,,the ,,old ,,paths ,,the ,,old ,,paths1 ,,or ,,the ,,talmud ,,tested ,,by ,,scripture2 ,,being ,a ,,comparison ,,of ,,the ,,principles ,,and ,,doctrines ,,of ,,modern ,,judaism1 ,,with ,,the ,,religion ,,of ,,moses ,,and ,,the ,,prophets4 ,,by ,,the ,,rev4 ,,alexander ,mc,c,a,u,l1 ,d4,d41 ,,late ,,professor ,,of ,,divinity1 ,,king',s ,,college1 ,,london2 ,,and ,,late ,,prebendary ,,of ,,st4 ,,paul',s4 ,,london3 ,,london ,,society',s ,,house1 #af1 ,lincoln's ,inn ,fields4 #ahhj4 ,,to ,,the ,,right ,,honourable ,,and ,,right ,,reverend ,,charles ,,james1 ,,lord ,,bishop ,,of ,,london1 ,,etc41 ,,etc41 ,,whose ,,approbation ,,of ,,his ,,labours ,,has ,,been ,,an ,,encouragement ,,and ,a ,,reward1 ,,the ,,following ,,pages ,,are ,,respectfully ,,and ,,gratefully ,,inscribed1 ,,by ,,the ,,author4 ,,advertisement ,,to ,,the ,,second ,,edition4 ,nine years have now elapsed since 8,the ,old ,paths0 appeared as a volume4 ,they have been translated1 in the meantime1 into ,hebrew1 ,german1 and ,french2 and their merits discussed by the learned and unlearned of the ,jewish people1 in all the countries of their dispersion4 ,the reception has in general been favourable1 and the effect upon the ,jewish mind perceptible4 ,since their first appearance1 the ,west ,london ,synagogue and the ,liturgies of the ,british ,jews1 both renouncing that which 8,the ,old ,paths0 pronounced objectionable1 have started into existence4 ,the assembled rabbies at ,brunswick and ,frankfort have discussed topics similar to some treated in 8,the ,old ,paths10 and in some cases come to similar conclusions respecting the value of ,rabbinic ,traditions4 ,the ,reform ,societies of ,germany have commenced a formidable attack upon the ,oral ,law1 and a free discussion is now carried on in the numerous ,jewish periodicals of that country1 of which the results are easily foretold4 ,the promised ,german translation of the ,talmud1 if ever completed1 must1 without any discussion1 overthrow ,talmudism4 ,its exhibition in any ,european language is the most fatal attack that can be made on its authority4 ,it needs only to be seen as it is1 in order to be rejected4 ,the reader is again warned against mistaking this discussion of the merits of ,rabbinism for an attack upon the ,jewish people1 or the rabbies of the present day4 ,the reproach attaches not to the victims1 but to the authors of tradition4 ,the ,jews are a great and a noble people1 and the majority ignorant of the details of the system1 by which they have been bowed down and misrepresented for centuries2 so ignorant1 indeed1 that some zealously undertake a defence of the whole1 maintain that ,rabbinism is a perfect model of charity and wisdom1 and regard 8,the ,old ,paths0 as a mere emanation of common ,anti-,jewish prejudice4 ,such persons are requested to compare these papers with the articles in the ,jewish periodical1 entitled1 8,der ,israelit des ,neunzehnten ,jahrhunderts10 written by ,rabbi ,dr4 ,holdheim1 and other distinguished ,jewish scholars4 ,they will there find that1 had the author not been influenced by a desire to avoid all occasion of unnecessary offence1 truth might have been stated with more severity4 ,a mistake in one number1 not1 however1 affecting the argument1 has been corrected4 ,,advertisement ,,to ,,the ,,first ,,edition4 ,the reader will perceive1 by the date at the head of each number1 that the following papers were published weekly1 and1 from the contents1 he will readily infer that they were intended for distribution amongst those ,jews who still adhere to the rabbinic system4 ,but in presenting them to the public as a volume1 it may be well to state that the great object was to exhibit ,judaism as it appears in its practical workings1 and that1 therefore1 most references are made to the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 and to the codes of law commonly in use amongst rabbinic ,jews1 and which are considered as authoritative4 ,it was the ,author's wish1 not to ridicule any man's superstition1 but to instruct those1 whom ,moses and the ,prophets would have declared to be in error4 ,he has therefore1 carefully avoided the tone in which ,eisenmenger and others have treated this subject1 and1 in treating the ,jewish legends1 has confined himself to those which are mentioned in the prayers of the ,synagogue4 ,the materials are the result of many years' study and practical observation4 ,buxtorf1 ,majus1 ,edzard1 ,eisenmenger1 ,wagenseil1 c41 have been carefully consulted1 but the ,jewish ,liturgies1 the ,arbah ,turim1 the ,shulchan ,aruch1 the ,yad ,hachasakah1 are the principal sources1 whence this view of ,judaism has been drawn4 ,the ,author has only to add a hope1 that these papers may not be misunderstood1 either by ,jew or ,christian1 but that all who read them will carefully distinguish between ,judaism and the ,jewish people--and a wish1 that they may contribute to the welfare of ,israel1 and the promotion of truth4 ,,contents4 ,i4 ,rabbinism not a ,safe ,way of ,salvation #a ,,ii4 ,implicit ,faith not due to the ,rabbies #h ,,iii4 ,rabbinic ,injustice to ,women1 ,slaves1 and ,gentiles #af ,,iv4 ,rabbinic ,intolerance towards other ,nations #bd ,v4 ,talmudic ,intolerance contrasted with the ,charity of the ,bible #cb ,,vi4 ,compulsory ,conversion of the ,gentiles #ci ,,vii4 ,the ,feast of ,purim #dg ,,viii4 ,rabbinic ,contempt for the ,sons of ,noah #ee ,,ix4 ,christians cannot be reckoned amongst the 8,pious of the ,nations of the ,world0 #fc ,x4 ,rabbinic ,washing of ,hands #gj ,,xi4 ,rabbinic ,artifices respecting ,leaven at the ,passover #gi ,,xii4 ,the ,passover a ,type of ,future ,deliverance #hg ,,xiii4 ,severity of the ,rabbinic ,ordinances #ie ,,xiv4 ,severity and ,artifice #ajc ,,xv4 ,sabbath ,mixture #aaa ,,xvi4 ,intolerance of ,rabbinic ,prayers #aai ,,xvii4 ,rabbinic ,legends in the ,synagogue ,services #abg ,,xviii4 ,rabbinic ,legends1 continued #acf ,,xix4 ,legends in the ,prayers for ,pentecost #add ,,xx4 ,legends in the ,prayers for ,pentecost #aeb ,,xxi4 ,legends in the ,prayers for ,pentecost #afj ,,xxii4 ,rabbinic ,magic #afg ,,xxiii4 ,astrology #age ,,xxiv4 ,amulets #ahc ,,xxv4 ,charms #aia ,,xxvi4 ,charms1 continued #aii ,,xxvii4 ,sabbatic ,laws #bjg ,,xxviii4 ,fast for the ,destruction of the ,temple #bae ,,xxix4 ,sabbatic ,laws1 continued #bbc ,,xxx4 ,sabbatic ,laws1 continued #bca ,,xxxi4 ,rabbinic ,excommunication #bci ,,xxxii4 ,new ,year's ,day #bdg ,,xxxiii4 ,new ,year1 continued #bee ,,xxxiv4 ,new ,year1 continued #bfb ,,xxxv4 ,justification #bgj ,,xxxvi4 ,day of ,atonement #bgi ,,xxxvii4 ,feast of ,tabernacles #bhg ,,xxxviii4 ,prayers for the ,dead #bie ,,xxxix4 ,almsgiving #cjb ,,xl4 ,priests and ,levites #caj ,,xli4 ,rabbinic ,ideas of the ,deity #cai ,,xlii4 ,title of ,rabbi #cbf ,,xliii4 ,sanhedrin #ccd ,,xliv4 ,sanhedrin1 continued #cdb ,,xlv4 ,sanhedrin1 continued #cdi ,,xlvi4 ,contempt for the ,female ,character #ceg ,,xlvii4 ,polygamy #cfe ,,xlviii4 ,divorce #cgb ,,xlix4 ,rabbinic ,laws concerning ,meat #chj ,l4 ,the ,birth of ,messiah #chg ,,li4 ,slaughtering of ,meat1 continued #cif ,,lii4 ,laws concerning ,meat with ,milk #djc ,,liii4 ,rabbinism oppressive to the ,poor #daa ,,liv4 ,gentile ,wine #dai ,,lv4 ,mourning for the ,dead #dbg ,,lvi4 ,dispensation from an ,oath #dcd ,,lvii4 ,doctrine of ,oaths1 continued #ddb ,,lviii4 ,meritoriousness of ,circumcision #ddi ,,lix4 ,cruelty to the ,unlearned #deg ,,lx4 ,recapitulation #dfd ,no4 ,i4#a ,,rabbinism ,,not ,a ,,safe ,,way ,,of ,,salvation4 ,,salvation ,,is ,,of ,,the ,,jews4 ,amongst all the religions systems existing in the world1 there are but two deserving of attentive consideration1 and they are both of ,jewish origin1 and were once exclusively confined to the ,jewish nation4 ,they are now known by the names of ,judaism and ,christianity2 but it must never be forgotten that the latter is as entirely ,jewish as the former4 ,the ,author of ,christianity was a ,jew4 ,the first preachers of ,christianity were ,jews4 ,the first ,christians were all ,jews2 so that1 in discussing the truth of these respective systems1 we are not opposing a ,gentile religion to a ,jewish religion1 but comparing one ,jewish creed with another ,jewish creed4 ,neither in defending ,christianity1 do we wish to diminish aught from the privileges of the ,jewish people2 on the contrary1 we candidly acknowledge that we are disciples of the ,jews1 converts to ,jewish doctrines1 partakers of the ,jewish hope1 and advocates of that truth which the ,jews have taught us4 ,we are fully persuaded that the ,jews whom we follow were in the right--that they have pointed out to us 8the old paths10 8the good way10 and 8we have found rest to our souls40 ,and we1 therefore1 conscientiously believe1 that those ,jews who follow the opposite system are as wrong as their forefathers1 who1 when ,god commanded them to walk in the good old way1 replied1 8,we will not walk therein40 ,some modern ,jews think that it is impossible for a ,jew to be in error1 and that a ,jew1 because he is a ,jew1 must of necessity be in the right4 ,such persons seem to have forgotten how the majority of the people erred in making the golden calf--how the generation that came out of ,egypt died in the wilderness because of their unbelief--how the nation at large actually opposed and persecuted the truth of ,god in the days of ,elijah--how their love of error sent them into the ,babylonish captivity--and how there has been some grievous error of some kind or other1 which delivered them into the hands of the ,romans1 and has kept them in a state of dispersion for so many hundred years4 ,but the passage from which our motto is taken sets forth most strikingly the possibility of fatal mistake on the part of the ,jewish nation1 and also the possibility1 in such a case1 of ,god's turning to the ,gentiles4 8,thus saith the ,lord1 ,stand ye in the ways1 and see1 and ask for the old paths1 where is the good way1 and walk therein1 and ye shall find rest for your souls4 ,but they said1 ,we will not walk therein4 ,also1 ,i set watchmen over you1 saying1 ,hearken to the sound of the trumpet4 ,but they said1 ,we will not hearken4 ,therefore hear1 ye nations1 1 and know1 ,o congregation1 what is among them4 ,hear1 ,o earth2 behold1 ,i will bring evil upon this people1 even the fruit of their thoughts1 because they have not hearkened unto my words1 nor to my law1 but rejected it40--,jer4 vi4 #af-ai4 ,who will dare to deny1 after such a passage1 the possibility of a ,jew's being in error8 ,but some may ask1 ,what is ,judaism8 what is ,christianity8 ,,answer4--,judaism is that religious system contained and acknowledged in the prayers of the ,jewish synagogue1 whether ,german or ,portuguese1 and professed by all who use them as the ritual of their worship4 ,christianity is the religious system taught in the ,new ,testament2 or1 in other words1 ,judaism is the ,old ,testament explained according to the traditional law1 4 ,christianity is the ,old ,testament explained according to the ,new4 ,according to this explanation1 the ,jewish ,prayer-book teaches the divine authority of the oral law4 ,of this there can be no doubt1 for1 in the first place1 the whole ritual of the synagogue service1 and the existence and arrangement of the synagogue itself1 is according to the prescription of the oral law1 as may be seen by comparing the ,jewish prayers with the ,hilchoth ,t'phillah4 ,if it be asked why the ,jew uses these prayers1 and no other--why he wears phylacteries 77 and the veil 77--why he conforms to certain ceremonies at the ,new ,year1 and the ,day of ,atonement1 and the other feasts--why he repeats a certain benediction at the reading of the law--why he reads out of a parchment roll1 rather than out of a printed book--why a roll of the law written in one way is lawful1 and in another way unlawful1 the only answer is1 the oral law commands us thus to do4 ,the whole synagogue worship1 therefore1 from the beginning to the end of the year1 is a practical confession of the authority of the oral law1 and every ,jew who joins in the synagogue worship does1 in so far1 conform to the prescriptions of ,rabbinism4 ,but1 secondly1 the ,jewish ,prayer-book explicitly acknowledges the authority of the oral law4 ,in the daily prayers1 fol4 #aa1 is found a long passage from the oral law1 beginning1 1 8which are the places where the offerings were slaughtered10 c4 ,on fol4 #ab1 we find the thirteen ,rabbinical rules for expounding the law1 beginning1 1 8,rabbi ,ishmael says10 c4 ,at the end of the daily prayers we find a whole treatise of the oral law1 called1 1 8the ethics of the fathers10 the beginning of which treatise asserts the transmission of the oral law4 ,in the morning service for ,pentecost1 there is a most comprehensive declaration of the authority and constituent parts of the oral law4 8,he1 the ,omnipotent1 whose reverence is purity1 with his mighty word he instructed his chosen1 and clearly explained the law1 with the word1 speech1 commandment1 and admonition1 in the ,talmud1 the ,agadah1 the ,mishna1 and the ,testament1 with the statutes1 the commandment1 and the complete covenant10 c41 p4 #hi4 ,in this prayer1 as used1 translated1 and published by the ,jews themselves1 the divine authority of the oral law is explicitly asserted1 and the ,talmud1 ,agadah1 and ,mishna1 are pointed out as the sources where it is to be found4 ,for these two reasons1 then1 we conclude that the ,judaism of the ,jewish ,prayer-book is identical with the ,judaism of the oral law1 and that every ,jew who publicly joins in those prayers does1 with his lips at least1 confess its divine authority4 ,having explained what we mean by ,judaism1 we now go on to another preliminary topic4 ,some one may ask1 what is the use of discussing these two systems8 ,may they not both be safe ways of salvation for those that profess them8 ,to this we must1 according to the plain declarations of these systems themselves1 reply in the negative4 ,the ,new ,testament denounces the oral law as subversive of the law of ,god4 8,then the ,pharisees and scribes asked him1 ,why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders1 but eat bread with unwashen hands8 ,he answered and said unto them1 ,well hath ,esaias prophesied of you hypocrites1 as it is written1 ,this people honoureth me with their lips1 but their heart is far from me4 ,howbeit in vain do they worship me1 teaching for commandments the doctrines of men40 7,mark vii4 #e-g47 ,the oral law is still more exclusive4 ,it excludes from everlasting life all who deny its authority1 and explicitly informs us that ,christians are comprehended in anathema1-- 8,these are they who have no part in the world to come1 but who are cut off1 and perish1 and are condemned on account of the greatness of their wickedness and sin for ever1 even for ever and ever1 the heretics and the ,epicureans1 and the deniers of the law10 c4 ,here is the general statement4 ,but to prevent all mistake1 a particular definition of each of these classes is added1 from which we extract the following passage3-- 8,there are three classes of the deniers of the law4 ,he who says that the law is not from ,god1 yea1 even one verse or one word3 or if he says that ,moses gave it of his own authority4 ,such an one is a denier of the law4 ,thus1 also1 he who denies its interpretations3 that is1 the oral law1 and rejects its ,agadoth as ,sadok and ,baithos3 and he who says that the ,creator has changed one commandment for another1 and that the law has long since lost its authority1 although it was given by ,god1 as the ,christians and ,mahometans1 each of these three is a denier of the law40--,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 iii4 #h4 ,in the first extract we see that those persons called 8deniers of the law10 are1 according to the doctrine of modern ,judaism1 shut out from a hope of salvation4 ,in the second extract we see that ,christians are by name included in that class3 from the two together it inevitably follows that modern ,judaism teaches that ,christians cannot be saved4 ,we do not find any fault with modern ,judaism for pronouncing this sentence2 we do not tax the ,jews either with uncharitableness or intolerance because of this opinion4 ,on the contrary1 we honour those who1 conscientiously holding this opinion1 have the honesty and the courage to declare it4 ,if they consider us as deniers of the law1 they must1 of course1 believe that our state is far from safe2 and if this be their conviction1 the best proof which they can give of true charity1 is to warn us of our danger4 ,but1 at the same time1 when a religious system condemns us by name1 and pronounces sentence concerning our eternal state in so decided a tone1 and that simply because we dissent from some of its tenets1 we not only think that we have a right to defend ourselves and our religion1 but consider it our bounden duty to examine the grounds on which a system of such pretension rests1 and honestly1 though quietly1 to avow our reasons for rejecting it4 ,we know1 indeed1 that there are some ,rabbinical ,jews1 who think this sentence harsh1 and consider themselves justified in denying it1 because there is another sentence in this same oral law1 which says1 8that the pious amongst the nations of the world have a part in the world to come40 ,but can they prove1 by any citation from the oral law1 that ,christians are included 8amongst the pious of the nations of the world80 ,if they can1 then they will prove that in one place the oral law denies1 and in another place affirms the salvability of ,christians2 that is1 they will prove that the oral law contains palpable contradictions1 and therefore cannot be from ,god4 ,if they cannot produce any such citation1 then the general declaration that 8the pious of the nations of the world0 may be saved1 is nothing to the purpose2 for the same law which makes this general declaration1 does also explicitly lay down the particular exception in the case of ,christians1 and that after it has made the general declaration4 ,in fact1 the exception follows close on the heels of the general rule4 ,the general rule is1-- 4444 8,all ,israel has a share in the world to come 444 and also the pious of the nations of the world have a share in the world to come40 ,the words which immediately follow this declaration contain the exception1-- 8,but these are they which have no part in the world to come10 c4 ,this exception is1 therefore1 plainly made in order to guard against any false inference from the general statement1 and1 therefore1 according to the oral law1 ,christians cannot be saved4 ,we proceed1 therefore1 to inquire into the merits of this system1 which makes so decided a statement respecting our eternal state4 ,we have a standard of comparison to which no ,jew will object1 even that ,holy ,book1 which contains the writings of ,moses and the prophets4 ,we reject the oral law1 not because it seems in itself bad or good to our judgment1 but because it is repugnant to the plain words of the ,old ,testament4 ,there is not space to enter at large into the proof at present1 but we subjoin one passage1 which is in itself amply sufficient to disprove the divine authority of any religious system where it occurs4 ,in the ,talmud1 in the ,treatise ,pesachim1 fol4 #di1 col4 #b1 we read as follows3-- ,rabbi ,eleazar says1 8,it is lawful to split open the nostrils of an amhaaretz 7an unlearned man7 on the ,day of ,atonement which falls on the ,sabbath4 ,his disciples said to him1 ,rabbi1 say rather that it is lawful to slaughter him4 ,he replied1 ,that would require a benediction1 but here no benediction is needful40 ,it is hardly needful to remind the reader that the law of ,moses says1 1 8,thou shalt not kill40 ,but there is in this passage a sneering contempt for the unlearned1 which is utterly at variance with the character of ,him 8whose mercies are over all his works10 the unlearned and the poor1 as well as the mighty and the learned4 ,indeed the passage is so monstrous1 that one is almost inclined to think that it must have crept into the ,talmud by mistake2 or1 at the least1 to expect that it would be followed by reprehension the most explicit and severe4 ,but no1 a little lower down another of these 8wise men0 says1-- 1 8,it is lawful to rend an amhaaretz like a fish20 and1 a little above1 an ,israelite is forbidden to marry the daughter of such a person1 for that she is no better than a beast4 ,but the whole of the preceding passage is so characteristic of the spirit of ,rabbinism1 that it is worth inserting-- 1 8,our ,rabbies have taught4 ,let a man sell all that he has1 and marry the daughter of a learned man4 ,if he cannot find the daughter of a learned man1 let him take the daughter of the great men of the time4 ,if he cannot find the daughter of a great man of the time1 let him marry the daughter of the head of a congregation4 ,if he cannot find the daughter of the head of a congregation1 let him marry the daughter of an almoner4 ,if he cannot find the daughter of an almoner1 let him marry the daughter of a schoolmaster4 ,but let him not marry the daughter of the unlearned1 for they are an abomination1 and their wives are vermin2 and of their daughters it is said1 #8,cursed is he that lieth with any beast4'0 ,here1 again1 one is inclined to suppose that there is a mistake1 or that these words were spoken in jest1 though such a jest would be intolerably profane2 but all ground for such supposition is removed on finding this passage transcribed into the digest of ,jewish law1 called the ,schulchan ,aruch1 part #b2 in the ,hilchoth ,p'riah ur'viah1 by which transcription it is stamped1 with all the authority of a law4 ,here1 then1 the reader is led to think1 that an amhaaretz must mean something more and worse than an unlearned man--that it ought1 perhaps1 to be taken in its literal signification1 8people of the land10 and that it may refer to the idolatrous and wicked ,canaanites4 ,but the common usage of the ,talmud forbids a supposition4 ,there is a well-known sentence which shows that even a ,high ,priest might be an amhaaretz3-- 1 8,a learned man1 though illegitimate1 goes before a ,high ,priest1 who is an amhaaretz40 ,here the amhaaretz is plainly opposed to him that is learned4 ,and so1 on the page of the ,talmud from which we have quoted above1 we find the following words3-- 8,an amhaaretz is forbidden to eat the flesh of a beast1 for it is said1 #8,this is the law of the beast and the fowl4' 7,levit4 xi4 #df47 ,every one that laboureth in the law1 it is lawful for him to eat the flesh of the beast and the fowl4 ,but for him who does not labour in the law1 it is forbidden to eat the flesh of the beast and the fowl40 ,according to this passage an amhaaretz is one who does not labour in the study of the law2 and it being found on the very same page with the above most revolting declarations1 it plainly shows the proud and haughty spirit of the authors of the ,talmud1 and their utter contempt for the poor1 whose circumstances preclude them from the advantages of study4 ,but1 in reading such passages1 the question naturally suggests itself1 to which of the two classes does the poor ,jewish population of ,london belong8 ,there must be at the least hundreds1 if not thousands of poor ,jews in this great city who cannot possibly devote themselves to study4 ,amongst whom1 then1 are they to be classed8 ,amongst the learned 8 or amongst the unlearned 8 ,are they1 their wives1 and daughters1 as the ,talmud says1 to be called an abomination1 vermin1 and compared to the beasts8 ,or can a religion inculcating such sentiments proceed from that ,holy ,one who is no respecter of persons8 ,see here1 ye children of ,abraham1 whom the providence of ,god has placed amongst the children of poverty1 and cut off from the advantage of a learned education4 ,you are not disciples of the wise1 nor the great men of the time1 nor heads of synagogues1 nor almoners1 nor even schoolmasters4 ,you are quite shut out from these classes whom your ,talmudical doctors favour so highly4 ,see1 then1 in the above passages1 what the ,talmud says of yourselves1 your wives1 and daughters8 ,can you believe that this is the law of the ,god of ,israel8 ,can you think for one moment1 that these doctors knew 8the old paths10 8the good way80 ,if you do we must assure you that we cannot4 ,we rather find it in that book1 which says1 8,blessed is the man that considereth the poor and needy40 7,psalm xli4 #a47 ,and in that other book1 which speaks in the same spirit1 and says that 8,god hath chosen the foolish things of this world to confound the wise2 and the weak things of this world to confound the things which are mighty1 and base things of the world1 and things which are not1 to bring to nought things that are2 that no flesh should glory in his presence40 7#a ,cor4 i4 #bg1 #bh47 ,footnote #a3 ,published originally ,january #ae1 #ahcf4 ,no4 ,,ii4 ,,implicit ,,faith ,,not ,,due ,,to ,,the ,,rabbies4 ,it appears from the undisguised acknowledgments of the ,new ,testament1 that the doctors and rabbies of the ,jews1 the ,pharisees1 and scribes1 were the implacable enemies of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and that they were the main instruments in effecting his death4 ,the modern ,jews consider this fact as a sufficient apology for their rejection of his claims to the ,messiahship4 ,they take it for granted that the great and learned men of that day were also good men1 and that they had valid reasons for their conduct4 ,they think if ,jesus of ,nazareth had been the true ,messiah1 that the ,sanhedrin1 the great ,jewish council of the time1 would have acknowledged him1 and conclude that1 as they rejected him1 he cannot be the true ,messiah4 ,the ,new ,testament1 on the contrary1 accounts for their unbelief by plainly telling us1 that they were bad men2 and that they were enemies to the ,lord ,jesus1 because he told them the truth1 and exposed their hypocrisy4 ,now1 which of these two representations accords with the truth8 ,were the scribes and ,pharisees1 those great advocates of the oral law1 1 good men or bad men8 ,the readers of our first number will be in some degree qualified to answer this question4 ,could those be good men who profanely talked of the lawfulness of killing an unlearned man1 and who contemptuously compared the wives and daughters of the unlearned to 8vermin and beasts80 ,if they could talk with levity of 8rending like a fish0 an unlearned man1 one of their own brethren who had never done them any harm1 what were they likely to do with one who exposed their wickedness1 and boldly told them that they by their traditions made void the law of ,god8 ,the very fact1 that ,jesus of ,nazareth was put to death by such men1 is presumptive evidence1 that he was a good man1 and that his claims were just4 ,but1 however that be1 it is worth while to inquire into the charges1 which the ,new ,testament brings against these learned men1 and to see whether they are substantiated by the memorials of their character and spirit1 which they themselves have left us in their laws4 ,one of the charges preferred against them is1 that they were ambitious men1 covetous of worldly honour1 and loving the pre-eminence4 8,but all their works they do to be seen of men2 they make broad their phylacteries1 and enlarge the borders of their garments4 ,and love the uppermost rooms at feasts1 and the chief seats in the synagogues1 and greetings in the markets1 and to be called of men1 ,rabbi1 ,rabbi40 7,matt4 xxiii4 #e-g47 ,now1 is this charge true8 ,does the oral law justify this assertion1 or does it prove1 on the contrary1 that the enemies of ,jesus were humble1 pious men1 whose piety serves as a warrant for the uprightness of their conduct in their treatment of the ,lord ,jesus8 ,let the reader judge from the following laws which these men framed with respect to themselves4 ,in the first place they claim for themselves more honour and reverence than is due to a man's own parents3-- 8,as a man is commanded to honour and fear his father1 so he is bound to honour and fear his ,rabbi more than his father2 for his father has been the means of bringing him into the life of this world1 but his ,rabbi1 who teaches him wisdom1 brings him to the life of the world to come40 7,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah1 c4 #e47 ,this general rule is bad enough1 but the particulars are still worse4 8,if a man should see something that his father has lost1 and something that his ,rabbi has lost1 he is first to return what his ,rabbi has lost1 and then to return that which belongs to his father4 ,if his father and his ,rabbi be oppressed with a load1 he is first to help down that of his ,rabbi1 and then that of his father4 ,if his father and his ,rabbi be in captivity1 he is first to ransom his ,rabbi and afterwards his father unless his father be the disciple of a wise man 7i4e41 learned71 in which case he may ransom his father first40 ,how fearful is this doctrine6 ,a man is to see his father1 the author of his existence1 the guardian of his infancy1 who has laboured for his support1 and watched over him in the hour of sickness1 he is to see this friend1 to whom1 under ,god1 he owes everything1 pining away in the bitterness of captivity1 and yet1 when he has got the means of restoring him to liberty and his family1 he is to leave him still in all his misery1 and ransom the ,rabbi2 where is this written in the ,old ,testament8 8,honour thy father and thy mother10 is there the first commandment that follows after our duty to ,god1 and the first movement of natural affection4 ,but this ,rabbinical doctrine silences the voice of nature1 and makes void the law of ,god4 ,what is the doctrine of the ,new ,testament here8 8,if any provide not for his own1 and specially for those of his own house1 he hath denied the faith1 and is worse than an infidel40 7#a ,tim4 v4 #h47 ,the disciples of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ never claimed for themselves any honour like this4 ,in the passage just cited1 they plainly declare that the first1 in the circle of duties to men1 is the duty to our own flesh and blood4 ,and the only case in which the ,new ,testament permits a deviation from this rule1 is that where the same exception is made in the law of ,moses1 when love to parents would interfere with love to ,god4 8,if any man come to me and hate not his father and mother1 and wife and children1 and brethren and sisters1 yea1 and his own life also1 he cannot be my disciple40 7,luke xiv4 #bf47 ,here father and mother1 and kindred1 are put in one category with a man's own life1 in order to show that there is but one case in which the natural ties of blood may be overlooked1 and this is when the service of ,god requires it4 ,as it is also written in the law of ,moses1 8,if thy brother1 the son of thy mother1 or thy son1 or thy daughter1 or the wife of thy bosom1 or thy friend who is as thine own soul1 entice thee secretly1 saying1 ,let us go and serve other gods1 which thou hast not known1 thou nor thy fathers4444 ,thou shalt not consent unto him1 nor hearken unto him1 neither shall thine eye pity him10 c4 7,deut4 xiii4 #f-i47 ,and thus the tribe of ,levi is praised1 because 8,he said unto his father and his mother1 ,i have not known him2 neither did he acknowledge his brethren1 nor know his own children40 7,deut4 xxxiii4 #i47 ,but this ,talmudical law is widely different4 ,it has no saving clause to show that the case specified is an exception to the general rule4 ,it does not pretend to suppose that the father is a bad man1 or an idolater1 or an apostate4 ,it specifies but one exception1 and that is1 where the father is 8the disciple of a wise man20 otherwise1 though he be a good man1 and a pious man1 a loving and tender parent1 still he is to be disregarded by his own son1 and the ,rabbi preferred before him4 ,is it possible to doubt that the men who conceived1 sanctioned1 and promulgated a law like this1 had an eye to their own personal honour and interest8 ,is it reasonable to suppose that men who would sacrifice their own father to the honour of their ,rabbi1 would be very tender about the life of one who appeared1 like ,jesus of ,nazareth1 as an opposer of their pretensions8 ,or can the ,jews1 with the law and the prophets in their hands1 suppose that these men pointed to 8the old paths10 8the good way80 ,this is certainly not the doctrine of ,moses4 ,he says3-- 8,cursed be he that setteth light by his father or his mother1 and all the people shall say1 ,amen40 7,deut4 xxvii4 #af47 ,but these men did not stop here4 ,they were not content with being exalted above father and mother4 ,they did not scruple to assert1 that their honour was as sacred as that of ,god himself3-- 8,thou must consider no honour greater than the honour of the ,rabbi1 and no fear greater than the fear of the ,rabbi4 ,the wise men have said1 ,the fear of thy ,rabbi is as the fear of ,god40 ,they endeavour to prove the validity of these extravagant claims by such passages as ,exod4 xvi4 #h1 8,your murmurings are not against us1 but against the ,lord40 ,but they have taken for granted what they can never prove1 and that is1 that every ,rabbi is invested with the same office and authority as ,moses4 ,but where1 in all the law of ,moses1 is there any warrant for such an assumption8 ,moses could with all propriety say1 8,your murmurings are not against us1 but against the ,lord10 for he held a special commission from ,god1 and had proved to the people the reality of his commission by a series of miracles4 ,but this the ,rabbies never pretended to do4 ,in this dearth of evidence the advocates of tradition flee for refuge to ,deut4 xvii4 #h1 c4 8,if there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment1 between blood and blood1 between plea and plea1 and between stroke and stroke1 being matters of controversy within thy gates2 then shalt thou arise1 and get thee up into the place which the ,lord thy ,god shall choose2 and thou shalt come unto the priests1 the ,levites1 and unto the judge that shall be in those days1 and inquire1 and they shall show thee the sentence of judgment4 ,and thou shalt do according to the sentence1 which they of that place which the ,lord shall choose shall shew thee2 and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee2 according to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee1 and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee1 thou shalt do2 thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall show thee to the right hand nor to the left40 ,here1 say the traditionists1 is a plain and unequivocal command4 ,no doubt1 ,god here plainly declares what is to be done in a difficult case4 ,he commands the ,israelites to go to the place which the ,lord ,god chose1 that is1 to the place where was found the ark of the covenant2 and to inquire1 not of the ,rabbies1 but of the priests1 the ,levites1 and the judge 4 ,but this passage1 instead of proving that 8the fear of the ,rabbi is as the fear of ,god10 proves the contrary4 ,it supposes first1 that the ,rabbies and learned men may differ in judgment1 that there may be a controversy1 and consequently1 that one party may be in the wrong4 ,it1 therefore1 effectually overthrows ,rabbinical infallibility4 ,it shows that these learned men are1 after all1 only poor fallible creatures like ourselves1 and that1 therefore1 we are not to fear them as we would fear ,god1 nor reverence their dictates1 as the ,word of ,god4 ,it shows secondly1 that in a case of difficulty1 the ,israelites were not to appeal to the ,rabbies1 but to the priests 1 and to the judge 1 and even to them only in the place which the ,lord should choose4 ,there is not one word said about the ,rabbies or the wise men1 and1 therefore1 this passage completely annihilates all their lofty pretensions4 ,for centuries the place which the ,lord chose has been desolate1 and there has been no priest standing to minister before the ,lord4 ,the ,jews have thus lost all possibility of appeal4 ,they have neither ministering priest nor judge1 and the ,mosaic law nowhere recognises the pretensions of the ,rabbies4 ,but some ,jew may say1 that though this passage does not prove the authority of the ,rabbies1 it does at least warrant the ,jews in persisting to reject the claims of the ,lord ,jesus1 for that he was condemned by the priests1 and in ,jerusalem1 the place which the ,lord chose4 ,we confess that this objection is plausible2 but can easily prove that it is nothing more4 ,in order to this1 we ask the ,jews1 whether the above command to abide by the sentence of the priests is in every case1 and without any exception1 binding8 ,to this question there are two answers possible--,yes and ,no4 ,if they say ,no1 then they admit that the priests might sometimes be in the wrong1 and we would1 of course1 take advantage of this admission to show that they erred in their judgment on ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,they will then1 most probably1 say1 ,yes2 the sentence of the priests1 the ,levites1 and the judges1 is in every case binding1 and ,israel is commanded not to deviate from it1 either to the right hand or to the left1 upon pain of capital punishment4 ,we beg of them then to turn to the #bfth chapter of the ,prophet ,jeremiah1 and to consider the case there set before them4 ,we there find that ,jeremiah had delivered a message from ,god1 very similar to our ,lord's prediction of the destruction of ,jerusalem4 8,i will make this house like ,shiloh1 and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth40 ,we find1 further1 that for this message the priests condemned ,jeremiah to death1 just as their successors condemned ,jesus of ,nazareth4 8,now it came to pass1 when ,jeremiah had made an end of speaking all that the ,lord had commanded him to speak unto all the people1 that the priests1 and the prophets1 and all the people took him1 saying1 ,thou shalt surely die40 ,we find1 further1 that this sentence was pronounced 8in the place which the ,lord had chosen10 in the ,temple itself4 8,and all the people were gathered against ,jeremiah in the house of the ,lord40 ,we find1 further1 that the sentence against ,jeremiah was no rash sudden act1 but the deliberate judgment of the priests4 ,for when the princes of ,judah came afterwards to inquire into the matter1 8,then spake the priests and the prophets unto the princes and to all the people1 saying1 ,this man is worthy to die1 for he hath prophesied against this city1 as ye have heard with your ears40 ,now1 then1 we ask again1 whether the people of ,israel was in duty bound to abide by this sentence1 and not to decline from it1 either to the right hand or to the left8 ,we fearlessly reply1 that they were not bound by this sentence1 and that1 if they had executed it1 they would have been guilty of murder1 as ,jeremiah himself declares3 8,but know ye for certain1 that if ye put me to death1 ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves1 and upon this city1 and upon the inhabitants thereof3 for of a truth the ,lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears40 ,we infer1 therefore1 that it was possible for the priests1 assembled in solemn deliberation in the house of the ,lord1 to err in judgment1 and to pronounce on unrighteous sentence4 ,we infer1 further1 that it was possible for the priests so far to err1 as to condemn to death a true prophet of the ,lord4 ,we infer1 further1 that in such a case the people was not bound by this mistaken judgment2 but that it was their duty to decline from it1 both to the right hand and to the left4 ,we infer1 lastly1 that as the priests might mistake1 and unjustly condemn to death a true prophet1 their sentence against ,jesus of ,nazareth forms no more argument against the ,messiahship of ,jesus1 than the similar sentence just considered did against the true prophetic character of ,jeremiah2 and that it affords just as little warrant for ,jewish unbelief as the former sentence did for putting ,jeremiah to death4 ,but it may be asked1 if the judgment of the priests was not infallible1 and if men were sometimes justifiable in refusing it1 what use was there in the above commandment to apply to them in cases of difficulty1 and to abide by their sentence8 ,the answer to this is very simple4 ,the priest that stood to minister before the ,lord had it in his power1 before the destruction of the first ,temple1 to inquire of the ,lord and to receive a miraculous answer from ,god himself1 which answer was1 of course1 infallible1 and universally obligatory1 without the possibility of exception4 ,we find in the ,old ,testament many instances in which the ,israelites availed themselves of this power1 as in ,judges xx4 #bg1 8,and the children of ,israel inquired of the ,lord 7for the ark of the covenant of ,god was there in those days3 and ,phinehas1 the son of ,eleazar1 the son of ,aaron1 stood before it in those days71 saving1 ,shall ,i yet again go out to battle against the children of ,benjamin my brother1 or shall ,i cease8 ,and the ,lord said1 ,go up2 for to morrow ,i will deliver them into thine hand40 ,and in the history of ,david's life1 there are several instances of his employment of this miraculous power1 as #a ,sam4 xxiii4 #d1 8,then ,david inquired of the ,lord yet again4 ,and the ,lord answered him and said1 ,arise1 go down to ,keilah2 for ,i will deliver the ,philistines into thine hand40 ,in all such cases where the priest first inquired of the ,lord1 his sentence was1 of course1 infallible1 and the ,israelites were bound to abide by it4 ,but where they did not inquire of the ,lord1 their sentence was only that of fallible men1 and1 therefore1 not binding upon the consciences of the people4 ,of this sort was their sentence upon ,jeremiah4 ,being wicked men1 they did not choose to ask counsel of the ,lord1 but pronounced sentence according to the devices of their own hearts4 ,in the case of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ the priests could not ask counsel of the ,lord1 for in the second ,temple the ,urim and ,thummim1 and the ark of the covenant1 were wanting2 the miraculous power1 therefore1 did not exist1 and for this very reason the sentence of the priests1 during the whole period of the second ,temple1 was only fallible1 like that of other men1 and1 therefore1 not binding1 and consequently of no force as an argument against the ,messiahship of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,the above passage1 therefore1 from the #agth of ,deuteronomy1 is of no use to the ,rabbinical ,jews1 it does not prove the infallibility of the priests in the second ,temple1 and is still less applicable for sanctioning the traditions of the oral law1 and the extravagant claims of the ,rabbies4 ,having given this passage the consideration it deserves1 we now return to the laws which the ,rabbies have made in favour of themselves1 and for their own honour4 ,we consider that the two passages of the oral law already quoted1 prove that the ,new ,testament gives a fair delineation of their character4 ,when men1 without any warrant from ,god's ,word1 claim for themselves the same degree of reverence which is due to ,god1 it must be admitted that they are vainglorious and wicked in no ordinary degree4 ,but it is possible to descend to particulars3--,for instance1 our ,lord says1 that these men 8loved greetings in the market-places1 and to be called of men1 ,rabbi1 ,rabbi40 ,now one of the laws1 still extant1 forbids a man1 when speaking of his ,rabbi1 to call him by name3-- 1 8,it is forbidden to a disciple to call his ,rabbi by name1 even when he is not in his presence40 ,another law1 still extant1 prescribes the formula of greeting or salutation3-- 8,neither is he to salute his ,rabbi1 nor to return his salutation in the same manner that salutations are given or returned amongst friends4 ,on the contrary1 he is to bow down before the ,rabbi1 and to say to him1 with reverence and honour1 ,peace be unto thee1 ,rabbi40 ,the ,rabbinical ,jews1 who see this1 must not mistake us4 ,we do not consider it in anywise sinful1 but decorous1 to treat a ,rabbi with all due respect4 ,we should feel no objection ourselves to make a bow to a ,rabbi1 and to salute him in the prescribed formula4 ,but we cite these laws to show that the ,new ,testament gives a fair representation of the ,pharisees3 for men1 who could gravely sit down and enter into all these details of the mode in which they were to be honoured1 and then give out these laws as divine1 and1 besides all this1 call in the civil power to enforce them1 must have had no mean idea of themselves and their own dignity4 ,it must never be forgotten that these laws are not the mere regulations of a religious community4 ,when the ,rabbies had the power in their own hands1 they enforced them by civil sanctions4 ,they were not satisfied with excluding despisers of ,rabbinical authority from eternal life1 they prosecuted such before the tribunals1 and sentenced them to a pecuniary fine and excommunication1 as may be seen from the following law3-- 1 1 8,whosoever despises the wise men has no share in the world to come4 ,but notwithstanding this1 if there come witnesses to prove that he has been guilty of contempt1 even in words1 his sentence is excommunication1 and the tribunal 7house of judgment7 excommunicates him publicly1 and everywhere mulct him in a pound of gold1 and give it to the wise man4 ,he that despiseth a wise man in words1 even after his death1 is to be excommunicated by the tribunal10 c4 ,we now ask the ,jews of modern times what they think of those who made their own personal honour the subject of legislation1 who required the same reverence for their words as the ,word of ,god1 and who dragged up him that refused it before a tribunal1 had him sentenced to pecuniary fine1 and excommunication2 and1 besides all this1 excluded him from the hope of everlasting life8 ,had such men any idea of liberty of conscience8 ,no4 ,,iii4 ,,rabbinic ,,injustice ,,to ,,women1 ,,slaves1 ,,and ,,gentiles4 ,if any of our readers should think that the design of these papers is to represent the oral law as a system of unmixed evil1 we beg to assure them that they are mistaken4 ,we are fully aware that a system based on the law and the prophets1 must and does contain much that is good and worthy of admiration4 ,of this nature is the general command to all ,israelites to study the law1 which is as follows3--8,every man of ,israel is bound to study the law4 ,whether he be poor or rich1 healthy or unhealthy1 young or old1 yea1 though he live upon alms1 and beg from door to door1 and though he have a wife and children1 he is bound to set apart a fixed time for the study of the law1 by day and by night1 as it is written1 #8,thou shalt meditate therein by day and by night1'0 ,and again1 the maxim1 8,every one that is bound to learn is also bound to teach20 and that1 8therefore1 a man is bound to teach his son and his son's son10 c41 is in accordance with the plain command of ,god1 and is therefore good4 ,but the explanation and development of these good principles shows that the system itself is radically bad1 and therefore cannot be from ,god4 ,no one will deny that the ,rabbies are right in asserting the obligation resting on every ,israelite to study the law3 but they are wrong in their explanation of what the law is4 ,immediately after the above good command1 the oral law goes on to say1 8,every one is bound to divide the time of his study into three parts3 one-third to be devoted to the written law2 one-third to ,mishna2 and one-third to ,gemara30 so that the written law of ,god is to have only half as much attention as the traditions of men4 ,this is bad enough4 ,but the ,rabbies do not stop here4 ,they go on to say1 that this third of attention is only required when a man begins to study1 but that when he has made progress1 he is to read the law of ,god only at times1 and to devote himself to ,gemara4 8,what has been said refers only to the beginning of a man's learning1 but as soon as a man becomes great in wisdom1 and has no need of learning the written law1 or of labouring constantly in the oral law1 let him at fixed times read them1 that he may not forget any of the judgments of the law1 but let him devote all his days to ,gemara40 ,it is to be observed that 8oral law0 is here taken in a limited sense1 as referring to the expositions of the written law1 or1 as ,rabbi ,joseph ,karo#b explains it1 the ,mishna2 and ,gemara signifies the legal decisions which are inferred by a process of reasoning1 and to this third topic of ,jewish theology the ,israelites are commanded to give the chief of their time and attention1 rather than to the written ,word of ,god4 ,the apparent excellence of the above command to study the law is thus utterly destroyed by the ,rabbinical exposition of what is to be studied4 ,and if we go on to inquire upon whom this command is binding1 the ,rabbinical answer will afford just as little satisfaction4 ,when the ,rabbies say1 that 8every man of ,israel is bound to study the law10 they mean to limit the study to the men of ,israel1 and to exclude the women and slaves4 ,the very first sentence of the ,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah is 1 8,women and slaves and children are exempt from the study of the law40 ,according to this declaration1 women are not obliged to learn4 ,the following extract will confirm this opinion1 and at the same time show that there is no obligation on fathers to have their daughters taught4 1 1 1 8,a woman who learns the law has a reward1 but it is not equal to the reward which the man has1 because she is not commanded to do so3 for no one who does anything which he is not commanded to do1 receives the same reward as he who is commanded to do it1 but a less one4 ,but though the woman has a reward1 the wise men have commanded that no man should teach his daughter the law1 for this reason1 that the majority of women have not got a mind fitted for study1 but pervert the words of the law on account of the poverty of their mind4 ,the wise men have said1 ,every one that teacheth his daughter the law is considered as if he taught her transgression4#c ,but this applies only to the oral law4 ,as to the written law1 he is not to teach her systematically2 but if he has taught her1 he is not to be considered as having taught her transgression40 ,according to this decision1 it is absolutely forbidden to teach a woman the oral law2 and the teaching of it is looked upon as the teaching of transgression 4 ,we cannot forbear asking the advocates of the oral law1 whether it does not here testify against itself that it is bad4 ,it declares of itself that it is unfit for the perusal and study of the pure female mind1 and that it is as corrupting as the teaching of transgression4 ,we ask1 then1 can such a law be divine8 ,can it proceed from the ,god of ,israel1 who hath said1 8,be ye holy1 for ,i am holy80 ,what a noble testimony to the superiority of the written ,word1 and to the justice of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ's opposition to the oral law6 ,the oral law itself says1 8,he that teacheth his daughter the oral law1 is to be considered as if he taught her transgression4 ,he that teacheth her the written law1 is not to be so considered40 ,with such a confession1 we fearlessly ask the sons and daughters of ,israel1 who then was in the right8 ,jesus of ,nazareth1 who opposed it1 or the scribes and ,pharisees who defended it8 ,but 8the wise men0 also forbid ,israelites to teach women the written law1 and declare that women are not bound to learn4 ,for the prohibition they assign two reasons4 ,first1 they say that ,god has commanded them to teach only their sons1 in proof of which they refer to ,deut4 xi4 #ai1 8,and ye shall teach them your children40 ,in the ,hebrew it is 8your sons20 and the rabbies infer 1 8and not your daughters40#d ,secondly1 they say1 as we have seen above1 8that the majority of women have not got minds fitted for study10 and in the ,talmud#e this is attempted to be proved from ,scripture4 8,a wise woman once asked ,r4 ,eliezer1 ,how it was that after the sin of the golden calf1 those who were alike in transgressions did not all die the same death8 ,he replied1 ,a woman's wisdom is only for the distaff1 as it is written1 #8,all the women that were wise-hearted did spin with their hands4'0 7,exod4 xxxv4 #be47 ,we hesitate not to say1 that both these reasons are contrary to ,scripture4 ,we do not deny that signifies sons1 but we utterly deny the conclusion of the ,rabbies1 that because the masculine word is used1 therefore the women are not included in the command4 ,there is an abundance of instances in which the masculine word is used for children generally1 without any allusion to sex4 ,take for example ,exod4 xxii4 #bc 7in the ,english #bd71 8,and my wrath shall wax hot1 and ,i will kill you with the sword2 and your wives shall be widows1 and your children 7literally your sons7 orphans40 ,here again the masculine word is used1 so that if the ,rabbinical argument be valid in the above case1 it will be valid here1 and consequently the daughters are excluded from this denunciation1 so that the sons were to be orphans1 but not the daughters1 which is plainly impossible4 ,in the same way we can prove that the daughters of ,israel did not wander in the wilderness forty years1 for in ,numbers xiv4 #cc1 it is said1 8,and your children 7literally your sons1 and1 therefore1 according to ,talmudic logic1 not your daughters7 shall wander in the wilderness forty years40 ,the same logic will also prove that during the three days of miraculous darkness in ,egypt1 the women of ,israel were left in darkness as well as the ,egyptians1 for it is said all the children of ,israel 7 1 literally the sons of ,israel7 had light in their dwellings4 ,and thus also it might be proved that not one of the ten commandments is binding upon the women1 for the masculine gender is employed throughout4 ,this logic1 therefore1 is evidently false2 and we conclude1 on the contrary1 that as the women are included in all these passages--as they wandered through the wilderness1 and had light in their dwellings--and are bound to keep the ten commandments as well as the men1 so also they are included in the command1 8,ye shall teach them your children10 and that1 therefore1 the command of the oral law not to teach women1 is contrary to the ,word of ,god4 ,but we are not confined to argument1 ,god has plainly commanded that the women should learn as well as the men4 8,and ,moses commanded them1 saying1 ,at the end of every seven years1 in the solemnity of the year of release in the ,feast of ,tabernacles1 when all ,israel is come to appear before the ,lord thy ,god in the place which he shall choose1 thou shalt read this law before all ,israel in their hearing4 ,gather the people together1 men and women1 and children1 and thy stranger that is within thy gates1 that they may hear1 and that they may learn 1 and fear the ,lord your ,god1 and observe to do all the words of this law40 7,deut4 xxxi4 #aj-ab47 ,here a most beautiful order is observed1 and required of women as well as men2 hearing--learning--fearing--keeping the words of the law--,god wills that that women should fear him and keep his commandments as well as the men2 and therefore he wills that they should make use of the same means1 that they should hear1 and learn all the words of the law4 ,the traditionists have1 therefore1 in this case plainly made void the law of ,god4 ,god commands women as well as men to learn the law2 the ,rabbies say they are exempt from this duty4 ,god commands that the woman should be taught4 ,it is plain1 therefore1 that the oral law1 which contradicts the written law1 cannot be from ,god4 ,the command of ,god is so plain that it is unnecessary to enter deeply into the second ,rabbinical reason for the prohibition to teach women the law4 ,it is evident that ,god did not think that the poverty of their understanding was any obstacle to their learning his will4 ,indeed it has pleased ,him to show that ,he is no respecter of persons with regard to male or female1 more than with regard to rich or poor4 ,he has not only given them his law1 but conferred on women as well as men the gift of prophecy1 so that the names of ,deborah1 ,hannah1 and ,huldah1 must ever be remembered amongst the inspired messengers of ,god4 ,the ,rabbies seem to have forgotten that 8the fear of the ,lord is the beginning of wisdom10 and that this fear may be implanted by ,god just as easily in the heart of a woman as of a ,rabbi4 ,but without inquiring further into their reasons or their motives1 suffice it to say1 that the oral law in thus robbing women of their right and inheritance in the law of ,god1 and in degrading them to the same category with children and slaves1 is opposed to the plain commands of the written law4 ,but not so the ,new ,testament4 ,it exactly agrees with the ,old in considering woman as a rational and responsible being1 and a candidate for everlasting life4 ,it1 therefore1 gives one general rule for the education of children1 male and female4 8,ye fathers1 provoke not your children to wrath1 but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the ,lord40 7,ephes4 vi4 #d47 ,it does indeed prescribe modesty and subjection to the women in the mode or learning1 but in so doing it plainly points out their duty to become acquainted with the will of ,god4 8,let the woman learn in silence with all subjection4 ,but ,i suffer not a woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man1 but to be in silence40 7#a ,tim4 ii4 #aa1 #ab47 ,in these and other passages the woman is placed in the position assigned her in the ,old ,testament1 and not in the very subordinate rank imposed upon her by the oral law4 8,women1 and slaves 771 and children1 are exempt from the study of the law40 ,but we think that this rule is as false with regard to slaves as to women4 ,here the oral law says that slaves are not bound to learn4 ,in ,hilchoth ,avadim1 c4 viii4 #ah1 we find that they are not to be taught4 8,it is forbidden to a man to teach his slave the law40 ,but1 alas1 the passage of the ,word of ,god which forbids it1 is not referred to4 ,it is only an inference from the passage1 8,ye shall teach your sons20 but is evidently contrary to the whole tenour of the law of ,moses4 ,in the first place1 the ,israelite who had been sold by the tribunal1 or who1 on account of poverty1 had sold himself1 was still an ,israelite1 and did not forfeit1 finally1 his right to his inheritance in the land2 how1 then1 could he forfeit his right to the law1 which ,moses gave as 8the inheritance of the congregation of ,jacob80 ,the law of ,moses expressly provides a day of rest 8for the man servant and the maid servant10 that they may not only have rest for their bodies1 but may have time to learn the will of ,god1 and provide for that eternity to which they are hastening as well as their masters4 ,indeed1 if meditation on the ,word of ,god was more necessary for one ,israelite than another1 it was for the ,hebrew servant4 ,if he had been guilty of theft1 and had been sold by the tribunal1 he had special need of instruction in the law of ,god to lead him to repentance1 and to teach him his duty for the future4 ,if he had been guilty of no crime1 but had been compelled by poverty to sacrifice his liberty1 surely he needed the consolation which the ,word of ,god can supply1 to enable him to bear his hard lot with patience1 and to prevent him from murmuring4 ,but here the oral law steps in1 and actually prohibits his master from teaching him2 and instead of encouraging him in his leisure time to turn to the ,word of ,god as his refuge and his comfort1 it tells him that he is not bound to study it4 ,here1 again1 the ,new ,testament is much more like the law of ,moses1 which breathes1 all through1 a spirit of the most tender compassion for those in servitude4 ,moses commands the ,israelites to remember that they had themselves been bondmen in ,egypt4 ,the ,new ,testament reminds ,christian masters that they have a master in heaven4 8,ye masters1 do the same things unto them1 forbearing threatening3 knowing that your master also is in heaven2 neither is there respect of persons with him40 7,ephes4 vi4 #i47 ,it also plainly teaches that the relation which exists between believing masters and servants is1 before ,god1 that of brethren4 8,and they that have believing masters1 let them not despise them1 because they are brethren2 but rather do them service because they are faithful and beloved1 partakers of the benefit40 7#a ,tim4 vi4 #b47 ,yea1 the ,new ,testament lays down a general principle1 the very opposite of that1 that 8women1 and slaves1 and children are exempt from the study of the law40 ,it says1 8,there is neither ,jew nor ,greek1 there is neither bond nor free1 there is neither male nor female1 for ye are all one in ,christ ,jesus40 7,gal4 iii4 #bh47 ,it does not dispense men from their relative duties1 nor deprive any of their legitimate privileges1 but teaches that for all1 ,jew or ,greek1 bond or free1 male or female1 there is but one way of salvation4 ,very different is the doctrine of the oral law4 ,we have seen that it makes a grand distinction between male and female1 bond and free1 we need not1 therefore1 be surprised if it make the line of demarcation broader still between ,jew and ,greek4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,a ,gentile who employs himself in the law is guilty of death4 ,he is not to employ himself except in the seven commandments that belong to the ,gentiles4 ,and thus a ,gentile who keeps a ,sabbath1 though it be on one of the week days--if he make it to himself as a ,sabbath1 he is guilty of death4 ,it is not necessary to add1 if he appoint for himself a festival4 ,the general rule is that they are not permitted to innovate in religion1 or to make commandments for themselves out of their own heads4 ,either let a ,gentile become a proselyte of righteousness1 and take upon him the whole law3 or let him remain in his own law1 and neither add nor diminish4 ,but if he employs himself in the law1 or keeps a ,sabbath1 or makes any innovation1 he is to be beaten and punished1 and informed that he is for this guilty of death--but he is not to be killed40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 x4 #i47 ,this law is taken from the ,talmudical treatise ,sanhedrin1#f where it is followed by an apparently contradictory statement1 8that a ,gentile who employs himself in the law is as good as a high priest20 but the contradiction is immediately removed by the explanation which there follows1 and says1 that 8law0 is to be understood of the seven commandments of the ,gentiles4 ,now we admit liberty of conscience was not understood at the time2 and that it would be unjust to expect that the compilers of the oral law 7who were ignorant of1 or opposed to1 the ,new ,testament1 where liberty of conscience was first plainly revealed7 should be at all elevated above the level of their own times4 ,but making this admission and apology for the men1 we cannot help saying that the law itself is bad1 and cannot be from ,god4 ,religion is a matter between ,god and man4 ,the heart1 the conscience1 and the understanding are all alike concerned4 ,instruction out of ,god's ,word is1 therefore1 the only means of producing conviction4 ,entertaining these sentiments1 we endeavour to compare the oral law with the ,word of ,god1 and to convince its advocates that they are in error4 ,we do not wish to have the modern ,jews confounded with the authors of the system4 ,very many ,jews of the present day are ignorant of its details4 ,not having time to make the inquiry1 they take it for granted1 that their forefathers were right in preferring their own system to ,christianity1 and that they are bound to do the same4 ,but even those who are learned in the oral law1 and know its details1 are not to be viewed in the same light as the original compilers4 ,they have received the system from their forefathers1 and view it through the medium of filial affection and national prejudice4 ,they remember that to the ,jews the law was given1 and that the ,jewish nation has been the original instrument in ,god's hand to diffuse light over the world2 they have therefore hitherto taken it for granted that they must be right4 ,the narrow prejudices of ,christians for ages confirmed them in their views4 ,but now circumstances are different4 ,christians begin to understand the position in which ,god has placed the ,jewish nation1 and to look forward to their restoration to the favour of ,god as the time of blessing for the whole world4 ,christians can now honour and estimate the learning1 the talent1 and the constancy of those very ,rabbies whose system they consider as erroneous4 ,now1 then1 is the time for the ,jews themselves to inquire into those religious opinions1 which have been handed down to them1 and to compare them with the law and the prophets4 ,we trust that many will admit1 that the laws which we have been considering are bad1 and therefore cannot be from ,god4 ,let them then remember1 that the originators of these laws are the men who rejected the claims of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,if then these men were in error in making these laws1 they were in condemning ,jesus of ,nazareth because he opposed them2 and if the laws be bad1 the ,lord ,jesus was right in opposing them4 ,yea1 and where they taught error ,he and his disciples taught the truth4 ,the ,rabbies have taught constraint4 ,jesus of ,nazareth and his disciples have taught that fire is not to be called down from heaven on those who differ from us2 that 8the servant of ,god must not strive2 but be gentle to all men1 apt to teach1 patient1 in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves2 if ,god will peradventure give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth40 7#b ,tim4 ii4 #be47 ,footnote #b3 ,joreh ,deah1 sec4 #bdf4 ,footnote #c3 ,literally1 4 ,in the translation of this word we follow the interpretation of the ,joreh ,deah1 which renders it 4 ,this is obviously not the place to discuss the other opinions of the ,rabbies4 ,footnote #d3 ,see ,kiddushin1 fol4 #bi1 col4 #b4 ,footnote #e3 ,joma41 fol4 #ff1 col4 #b4 ,footnote #f3 ,fol4 #ei1 col4 #a4 ,no4 ,,iv4 ,,rabbinic ,,intolerance ,,towards ,,other ,,nations4 ,the ,jewish deputies1 when asked by ,napoleon whether they considered ,frenchmen as their brethren1 replied in the affirmative1 and after quoting the ,mosaic laws respecting the stranger said1 8,to these sentiments of benevolence towards the stranger1 ,moses has added the precept of general love for mankind3 #8,love thy fellow-creature as thyself4'0#g ,and in the authorized ,jewish ,catechism used in ,bavaria1 after the explanation of the moral duties1 we find the following question3--8,are these laws and duties1 affirmative and negative commandments1 binding with respect to a non-,israelite80 ,,answer--8,by all means1 for the fundamental law of all these duties1 #8,love thy neighbour as thyself1' is expressly laid down by the ,holy ,scriptures in reference to the non-,israelite1 yea1 to the heathen1 as it is written1 #8,and if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land1 ye shall not vex him4 ,but the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born amongst you1 and thou shalt love him as thyself3 for ye were strangers in the land of ,egypt3 ,i am the ,lord your ,god4'0 7,levit4 xix4 #cc-ce47h ,these declarations are very explicit1 and1 as forming part of public documents1 highly satisfactory4 ,the representatives of the ,jewish people in ,france1 and the teachers of the ,jewish youth in ,bavaria1 declare1 that in the scriptural command1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself10 neighbour means fellow-man1 without distinction of nation or religion4 ,where then did they learn this interpretation8 ,from the ,talmud or from the ,new-,testament8 ,the ,jewish deputies say1 from the former4 ,on the page cited above they add1 8,this doctrine is also professed by the ,talmud4 ,we are bound1 says a ,talmudist1 to love as brethren all those who observe the ,noachides1#i whatever their religious opinions may otherwise be4 ,we are bound to visit their sick1 to bury their dead1 to assist their poor1 like those of ,israel4 ,in short1 there is no act of humanity which a true ,israelite is not bound to perform towards those who observe the ,noachides40 ,the ,bavarian ,catechism is more cautious4 ,it makes no such bold assertion respecting the ,talmud4 ,it only intimates that the oral law teaches this doctrine1 by subjoining to the passage from ,leviticus the same extract from ,maimonides1 alluded to by the ,jewish deputies4 ,the ,catechism gives the extract a little more at length1 and as follows3--8,we are bound in everything to treat the non-,israelite1 who sojourns with us1 with justice and with love1 as we would treat an ,israelite4 ,yea1 we are even bound to maintain him1 as the ,scripture teaches in the words1 #8,thou shalt give it to the stranger that is in thy gates1 that he may eat it4' 7,deut4 xiv4 #ba47 ,our wise men have commanded us for the good of society1 even to visit the sick of the heathen1 to bury their dead1 and to deal out alms to them3 for of our ,creator it is said1 #8,the ,lord is good to all2 and his tender mercies are over all his works4' 7,psalm cxlv4 #i47 7,maimonid4 ,hilchoth ,melachim1 #aj1 #ab470 ,no doubt the passage as here given1 both by the ,french deputies and the ,bavarian ,catechism1 is very plausible2 and if it could be found verbatim1 either in the ,talmud or any of its compendiums1 would go far to justify the bold assertion of the former1 and the cautious insinuation of the latter4 ,but unfortunately the original passage is very different4 ,in the above citations1 it is mutilated in order to suit the purpose of the citers4 ,in the ,jad ,hachasakah it stands as follows3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,and thus it appears to me1 that the proselytes allowed to sojourn are to be treated with the same courtesy and benevolence as the ,israelites2 for behold1 we are commanded to maintain them1 as it is written1 #8,thou shalt give it to the stranger 7proselyte7 that is in thy gates1 that he may eat it4' ,as to that saying of our wise men not to return their salute1 it refers to the ,gentiles1 not to the proselyte allowed to sojourn4 ,but even with regard to the heathen1 the wise men have commanded us to visit their sick1 and to bury their dead with the dead of ,israel1 and to feed their poor along with the poor of ,israel1 ,,for ,,the ,,sake ,,of ,,the ,,ways ,,of ,,peace3 for it is written1 #8,the ,lord is good to all1 and his mercies are over all his works2' and again1 #8,her ways are ways of pleasantness1 and all her paths are peace4'0 7,prov4 iii4 #ag47 ,the reader will observe that there are several striking differences between this translation and that of the ,bavarian ,catechism2 and these differences prove that1 by the word 8neighbour10 the oral law does not understand a fellow-man without any regard to his religious opinions4 ,first1 the ,bavarian ,catechism says1 8,we are bound in everything to treat the non-,israelite who sojourns with us with justice and with love1 and as we would treat an ,israelite40 ,the original says1 8,and thus it appears to me1 that the proselytes allowed to sojourn are to be treated with the same courtesy and benevolence as the ,israelites40 ,the ,bavarian ,catechism translates this passage as it if were the undisputed law of ,israel thus to act2 whereas ,maimonides only offers his own opinion4 ,he says1 8,it appears to me40 ,here the ,french deputies represent the matter more accurately1 by saying1 8,we are bound1 says a ,talmudist40 ,not the ,talmud1 but a ,talmudist4 ,then1 again1 the ,bavarian ,catechism speaks generally of 8non-,israelites40 ,maimonides speaks of only one particular class1 the proselytes who had permission to sojourn in the land of ,israel4 ,that we do not misrepresent ,maimonides' meaning1 is plain from the words of the ,jewish deputies1 who also restrict the sense to that one particular class4 8,we are bound1 says a ,talmudist1 to love as brethren all those who observe the ,noachides1 whatever their religious opinions may otherwise be40 ,here1 then1 on the showing of the ,jewish deputies themselves1 the ,talmud does not teach that all men are to be loved as brethren1 but only those who keep the seven commandments of ,noah4 ,how1 then1 are we to regard the idolater and the heathen1 who have not embraced these seven commandments1 and how are we to treat them8 ,this leads us to notice1 #b;dly1 ,the important omission made by the ,bavarian ,catechism4 ,in citing the words of ,maimonides1 the compilers have omitted the whole sentence1 8,as to the saying of our wise men not to return their salute1 it refers to the ,gentiles1 not to the proselytes allowed to sojourn40 ,to this sentence1 the ,french ,jewish deputies have also made no allusion2 and yet this sentence is found in the very middle of the passage quoted4 ,what goes before and what follows is quoted by both1 but both have with one common consent omitted this passage4 ,now this mere fact of omission is1 in itself1 sufficient to excite the suspicions of ,israelites not acquainted with the oral law4 ,the ,jewish deputies in ,paris1 and the compilers of the ,jewish ,catechism in ,bavaria1 had one common object--they wished to prove1 or to intimate1 that the ,talmud teaches us to love as ourselves all our fellow-men1 without any respect to religious differences4 ,in order to prove this1 they both refer to one and the same passage--and from the middle of that passage they both omit one important sentence4 ,what conclusion will be drawn by any man of common understanding8 ,just this1 that as they both quote one and the same passage1 there must be a great scarcity of proof from the ,talmud3 and that2 as they both make the same omission1 the sentence omitted must be unfavourable to that proof2 and that1 therefore1 this one passage does not prove that the ,talmud teaches any such doctrine4 ,such is the conclusion to which we are led by considering the facts of the case4 ,an examination of the omitted passage will show that this conclusion is most just--8,as to the saying of our wise men1 not to return their salute1 it refers to the ,gentiles1 not to the proselytes allowed to sojourn40 ,had this passage been inserted in its place1 the ,bavarian ,catechism could not have been translated 7sojourning proselytes7 8non-,israelites10 for from this passage it appears that these sojourners are different from the 8,gentiles10 whose salute is not to be returned4 ,in plain ,english1 this passage restricts 8the courtesy and benevolence0 to those proselytes who1 by taking upon them the seven commandments of ,noah1 obtained the privilege of sojourning in the land of ,israel2 and consequently excludes 8the ,gentiles0--and consequently disproves the assertion that the ,talmud teaches us to love as ourselves all our fellow-men without any respect to religious differences4 ,on the contrary1 this passage tells us that the salutation of the ,gentiles is not to be returned4 ,it prescribes two different lines of conduct to be pursued towards different religionists1 and makes the difference of religious persuasion the basis of the rule4 ,but some readers may say1 that the difference is very small--that the command 8not to return the salute of the ,gentiles10 is a mere matter of etiquette--whereas the command to visit the sick of the ,gentiles1 to bury their dead1 and to feed their poor2 is a substantial kindness4 ,this we should admit1 if the reason assigned for such conduct1 8for the sake of the ways of peace10 did not utterly remove all the apparent kindness4 ,and this brings us to3 ,the third misrepresentation of the ,bavarian ,catechism4 ,it translates the words 7for the sake of the ways of peace7 8for the good of society40 ,here1 then1 there is an evident difference between us4 ,but who is right8 ,we do not ask the ,israelite to believe us4 ,maimonides here refers to another passage of the oral law1 where this expression is fully explained1 and where the command 8not to return the salutation of the ,gentiles0 is also found4 ,we will give this passage1 and then the unlearned can judge for themselves3-- 4 4 1 1 1 ,d 1 1 8,the poor of the idolaters are to be fed with the poor of ,israel for the sake of the ways of peace4 ,they are also permitted to have part of the gleaning1 me forgotten sheaf1 and the corner of the field1 for the sake of the ways of peace4 ,it is also lawful to ask after their health1 even on their feast-day1 for the sake of the ways of peace2 but never to return 7literally1 reiterate7 the salutation1 nor to enter the house of an idolater on the day of his festival to salute him4 ,if he be met in the street1 he is to be saluted in a low tone of voice1 and with a heavy head4 ,but all these things are said only of the time that ,israel is in captivity among the nations1 or that the hand of the idolaters is strong upon ,israel4 ,but when the hand of ,israel is strong upon them1 we are forbidden to suffer an idolater amongst us1 even so much as to sojourn incidentally1 or to pass from place to place with merchandize4 ,he is not to pass through our land until he take upon him the seven commandments given to the children of ,noah1 for it is said #8,they shall not dwell in thy land1' 7,exod4 xxiii4 #cc17 not even for an hour4 ,but if he take upon himself the seven commandments1 then he is a proselyte permitted to sojourn 7 740 ,hilchoth ,accum1 c4 x4 #e c4 ,this is the passage alluded to1 and the reader may now judge whether the words1 8,for the sake of the ways of peace10 can be interpreted as the ,bavarian ,catechism renders them1 8for the good of society40 ,if so1 then 8the good of society0 is to be consulted only whilst the ,jews are in captivity1 and the ,gentiles have got the power3 but as soon as the ,jews get the the power1 8the good of society0 may safely be disregarded4 ,the meaning plainly is1 that in the present position of affairs it is advisable to keep the peace between ,jews and ,gentiles1 inasmuch as the ,gentiles are at present the strongest4 ,now1 then1 it is expedient to visit the sick1 and feed the poor1 and bury the dead of the ,gentiles1 for this will promote that object2 but when the tables are turned1 and the ,gentiles are the weakest1 there will be no necessity 8for the ways of peace10 or1 as the ,bavarian ,catechism has it1 8for the good of society40 ,it is plain1 therefore1 that the passage cited by the ,french deputies and the ,bavarian ,catechism1 does not answer the purpose for which it is cited4 ,it does not prove that the ,talmud teaches us to love our fellow-men as ourselves1 whatever be their religious opinions4 ,on the contrary1 it teaches that a wide distinction is to be made between one class of religionists and another3 and that if men be idolaters1 we are to show them no kindness1 except for fear of the consequences that might result from betraying our real sentiments4 ,when1 therefore1 the ,jewish deputies and the compilers of the ,bavarian ,catechism asserted the true explanation of the ,mosaic command1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself10 it is plain that they had not learned it from the ,talmud1 but somewhere else4 ,we hesitate not to say1 that they learned it from the ,new ,testament1 for there it is taught plainly1 repeatedly1 and without any reservation4 ,a certain lawyer once asked ,jesus of ,nazareth1 8,who is my neighbour8 ,and ,jesus answering1 said1 ,a certain man went down from ,jerusalem to ,jericho1 and fell among thieves1 which stripped him of his raiment1 and wounded him1 and departed1 leaving him half dead4 ,and by chance there came down a certain priest that way2 and when he saw him he passed by on the other side4 ,and likewise a ,levite1 when he was at the place1 came and looked on him1 and passed by on the other side4 ,but a certain ,samaritan1 as he journeyed1 came where he was2 and when he saw him1 he had compassion on him1 and went to him1 and bound up his wounds1 pouring in oil and wine1 and set him on his own beast1 and brought him to an inn1 and took care of him4 ,and on the morrow when he departed1 he took out two-pence1 and gave them to the host1 and said unto him1 ,take care of him2 and whatsoever thou spendest more1 when ,i come again1 ,i will repay thee4 ,which now of these three1 thinkest thou1 was neighbour to him that fell among the thieves8 ,and he said1 ,he that showed mercy on him4 ,then said ,jesus unto him1 ,go thou and do likewise40 7,luke x4 #bi1 c47 ,here then the ,lord ,jesus ,christ teaches us that we are to show kindness even to an idolater1 for that even he is included in the class specified by the word 8neighbour40 ,jesus of ,nazareth makes no limitation 8for the sake of the ways of peace10 but gives a general command4 ,and he appears to have selected this case of a man lying half dead1 in order to contrast it with a similar case supposed in the oral law4 8,if a ,gentile1 and idolater1 be seen perishing1 or drowning in a river1 he is not to be helped out4 ,if he be seen near to death1 he is not to be delivered4 ,but to destroy him by active means1 or to push him into a pit1 or such-like things1 is forbidden1 as he is not at war with us40#aj ,the ,lord ,jesus does not say that the man who went down from ,jerusalem to ,jericho was an idolater4 ,he only says1 8a certain man40 ,but he evidently intimates that he was such1 for if he had been a ,jew1 the priest and the ,levite would not have passed him without rendering assistance4 ,as he was only an idolater1 according to the oral law1 the priest and the ,levite were not simply not to blame in leaving him to his fate1 but were obeying a command4 ,they saw him perishing--near to death4 ,they did not use any violence to accelerate it4 ,they only looked at him1 and left him to perish4 ,so far1 then1 the lawyer who asked the question thought that the priest and ,levite were in the right4 ,but then the ,lord ,jesus introduces a ,samaritan1 whom the oral law also looks upon as an idolater1 and showing how he acted1 he appeals to the plain common sense of the questioner1 8,which of these three was neighbour to him that fell among thieves80 ,and the lawyer is compelled to acknowledge1 8,he that showed mercy40 ,we make a similar appeal to the advocates of the oral law4 ,we ask1 which is1 the oral law or the ,new ,testament1 the most like the law of ,god8 ,the oral law forbids you to help a poor dying fellow-creature in his hour of need1 because he is an idolater4 ,it commands you to stifle the natural instinct of the human heart1 which is indeed the voice of the ,god of nature--to behold the agonizing struggles1 and hear the heartrending cries of a drowning fellow-sinner1 and yet when you have it in your power to snatch him from the jaws of death1 and from that everlasting destruction which awaits him1 to leave him to his fate1 without help and without pity4 ,the ,new ,testament1 on the contrary1 tells you1 that though1 by his idolatry1 he has incurred the wrath of ,god1 yet he is your neighbour--that it is your duty to help him1 and by that very help to endeavour to lead him to the truth4 ,which then agrees with the law of ,god8 ,we are quite sure that the language of your heart is1 the ,new ,testament is right4 ,the oral law is wrong4 ,your brethren in ,france and ,bavaria have already proclaimed that opinion to the world4 ,in the answer of the ,jewish deputies to ,napoleon and in the ,bavarian ,catechism1 they have said1 8that we are to love our fellow-creature as ourselves10 whatever be his religion4 ,they have thus made an involuntary acknowledgment of the superiority of the ,new ,testament1 and of the benefit which it has been to the world4 ,just suppose1 for a moment1 that the scribes and ,pharisees had succeeded in extirpating the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 what would have been the consequence to you and to the world8 ,had the doctrines of ,jesus perished1 the oral law would have had an undisturbed and universal domination1 for the ,karaites have always been few in number1 and have never exerted any influence on mankind at large4 ,the ,jews in ,france1 ,bavaria1 as well as in ,england and elsewhere1 would all have known the law only according to the oral interpretation1 and consequently would not have understood the command1 8,thou shalt love they neighbour as thyself40 ,they would still have held the fearful doctrine1 that a perishing idolater was not to be helped4 ,they would1 moreover1 have had none but idolaters around them1 for all the knowledge of ,god that prevails amongst us ,gentiles comes from ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,jew and ,gentile1 then1 would have lived 8hateful and hating each other40 ,you may think1 perhaps1 that some mighty spirit would have burst the chains of tradition1 and reasserted1 the simple truth of ,god4 ,but such an event is altogether beyond the limits of probability4 ,one of the mightiest intellects that ever dwelt in a tenement of clay was that of ,moses1 the son of ,maimon2 a man whose learning and industry were equal to his genius4 ,if ever there was a ,jew1 who was likely to overcome the prejudices of tradition1 it was he4 ,and yet with all his genius and all his opportunities1 he never was able to arrive at the true sense of the command which we have just considered4 ,the atrocious passages1 which we have above discussed1 are all taken from his compendium of the oral law4 ,you are indebted1 then1 to ,jesus of ,nazareth for your deliverance from this foul error4 ,with respect to your duty to your neighbour1 your own brethren in ,france and ,bavaria confess1 that you are right if you follow ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and that you are wrong if you follow those who rejected him4 ,remember1 then1 that your duty to your neighbour is half of the whole law of ,god1 and examine whether the ,christians1 who are confessedly right in the second table of the law do not1 also1 possess the truth respecting the first4 ,footnote #g3 ,transactions of ,parisian ,sanhedrin1 p4 #agh4 ,footnote #h3 ,lehrbuch der ,mosaischen ,religion4 ,mnchen1 #ahbf1 page #aej4 ,footnote #i3 ,we quote the passage as we find it4 ,noachides is here taken for the seven commandments of the children of ,noah1 contrary to the usual acceptation of the word4 ,footnote #aj3 ,hilchoth ,accum1 c4 x4 #a4 ,no4 ,v4 ,,talmudic ,,intolerance ,,contrasted ,,with ,,the ,,charity ,,of ,,the ,,bible4 ,any one who considers the circumstances of the ,jewish people after the desolation of the first temple1 will be inclined to make great allowances for the spirit of the ,rabbinical laws against idolaters4 ,idolatry was not to them a mere system of religious error4 ,it was the source of all their misfortunes2 and idolaters were the destroyers of their country--the desolaters of their temple--and their own most cruel and tyrannical oppressors4 ,scarcely had they emerged from the horrors of the ,babylonish captivity1 when they were exposed to the insults and outrages as well as the persecutions of ,antiochus2 and hardly had they recovered from the havoc of his fury1 before they were overrun by the fierce and haughty ,romans1 who were at last the executioners of the wrath of the ,almighty4 ,they not only saw the abominations of idolatry1 but they felt the hard hand of the idolater2 no wonder1 then1 if they hated the man as well as the system4 ,in the ,hilchoth ,rotzeach there is a law which amply illustrates the misery of their situation1 and the habitual treatment which they received from idolaters4 ,according to this law1 8,it is forbidden to a ,jew to be alone with ,gentiles1 for they are suspected of shedding blood2 neither is a ,jew to join company with them in the way2 if he meet a ,gentile1 he is to cause him to pass on his right hand 7that the ,jew1 as the commentary says1 may be able to defend himself1 in case the ,gentile should make an attempt on his life72 if they be ascending a height1 or going down a descent1 the ,jew is not to be below and the ,gentile above him2 but the ,jew above and the ,gentile below1 lest he should fall upon him to kill him2 neither is he to stoop down before him1 lest he should break his skull40 ,what an affecting picture does this present of the ,jews under heathen domination2 and who can wonder if such treatment called forth the natural feelings of the human heart1 and dictated laws in the same fierce and merciless spirit8 ,we1 for our part1 are quite ready to admit and to deplore the mighty provocations1 which roused the spirit of retaliation in the ,rabbies1 and consequently1 to make all due allowance for the men4 ,but that is not the question before us4 ,we are inquiring whether their religious system1 the oral law1 is or is not from ,god1 and whether this religious system teaches ,jews to love all their fellow-men as themselves8 ,we have shown that the evidence adduced on this point by the ,french and ,bavarian ,jews1 proves the contrary2 and is therefore1 nothing to the purpose4 ,but we do not wish to rest the decision upon such limited proof1 even though it be strong2 we are willing to look at the whole system1 and to compare it with the law and the prophets1 which we all admit as divine authority4 ,we say1 then1 that the ,talmud not only does not teach us to love all our fellow-men1 but that it puts idolaters altogether without the pale of humanity4 ,we have seen already that it forbids its followers to save the life of a perishing idolater4 ,but it goes farther still1 and extends this precept even to an idolater's infant1 which knows not its right hand from its left3-- 8,a daughter of ,israel shall not suckle the son of a heathen woman1 because that would be to bring up a son for idolatry2 neither shall she act as midwife to a heathen idolatress4 ,but if she should1 it must be for pay1 on account of the enmity 7that might otherwise be excited704 7,hilchoth ,accum1 c4 ix4 #af47 ,what is meant by 8pay1 on account of the enmity10 is fully explained in the following passage1 which forbids a ,rabbinical physician to cure a sick idolater3-- 8,hence thou learnest1 that it is forbidden to cure idolaters even for pay4 ,but if 7an ,israelite7 is afraid of them1 or is anxious on account of enmity1 he may cure them for pay2 but to do it gratuitously is forbidden40 ,hence the commonest offices of humanity are forbidden4 ,but the ,talmud goes further still1 and prohibits even the giving of good advice to these outcasts4 444 1 8,it is forbidden to give good advice to a heathen or to a wicked slave4444 ,daniel was exposed to danger for no other reason than this1 that he advised ,nebuchadnezzar to give alms1 as it is written1 #8,wherefore1 ,o king1 let my counsel be acceptable unto thee4' 7,dan4 iv4 #bc1 in ,english #bg470aa ,a more striking instance of the spirit of the ,talmud can hardly be found4 ,nebuchadnezzar was the benefactor of ,daniel1 and had elevated him from the situation of a captive to the first dignity of the empire2 and ,daniel had not refused1 but voluntarily taken upon himself the duties and responsibilities of the king's chief adviser4 ,under such circumstances1 an ordinary reader of the ,bible would imagine that ,daniel was bound by every tie of gratitude to his benefactor1 of duty and fidelity to his sovereign1 to give him the best advice in his power4 ,no1 says the ,talmud4 ,if the man be an idolater1 gratitude1 duty1 and fidelity are out of the question2 and because ,daniel exercised those godlike graces1 he was punished4 ,it appears1 at all events1 on the ,talmud's own showing1 that ,daniel was not a ,talmudist4 ,these extracts seem sufficient to prove1 that the ,talmud altogether excludes idolaters from all benefit of the command1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself40 ,the system which makes it unlawful to save his life1 to cure his sickness1 to suckle his child1 to help his wife in the hour of nature's trial1 or even to give him good advice1 can scarcely be said to teach us to love all our fellow-men1 without any regard to religious differences4 ,it may1 however1 be said1 that the passages adduced lead to this conclusion only by inference1 and that none of them expressly declares that an idolater is not our neighbour4 ,we shall1 therefore1 add a few passages where this is plainly taught4 1 1 8,he that steals from a ,gentile1 or he that steals property devoted to sacred purposes1 is only to pay the principal3 for it is said1 #8,he shall pay double unto his neighbour4' 7,exod4 xxii4 #h1 ,english #i47 ,to his neighbour1 not to devoted property4 ,to his neighbour1 and not to a ,gentile40 7,hilchoth ,genevah1 c4 ii4 #a47 ,the same decision is given with respect to the law found1 ,levit4 v4 #bj1 in ,english vi4 #a1 8,if a soul sin1 and commit a trespass against the ,lord1 and lie unto his neighbour1 444 all that about which he has sworn falsely2 he shall even restore it in the principal1 and shall add the fifth part more thereto40 ,the oral law says-- 8,he that sweareth to a ,gentile must pay the principal1 but is not bound to add the fifth part--7why not87 because it is said1 #8and lie unto his neighbour4'0 7,hilchoth ,gezelah1 c4 i4 #g47 ,so that the reason here assigned why the ,gentile is not to get the fifth part in addition1 is1 because he is not a neighbour4 ,in like manner1 in the #aath chapter of this same treatise1 which treats of the restoration of things found1 it is expressly commanded to restore whatever belongs to a ,jew1 because he is a brother2 but to keep whatever belongs to an idolater1 because he is not a brother4 8,to restore to an ,israelite anything that he has lost1 is an affirmative commandment1 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt in any case bring them again unto thy brother4'0 7,deut4 xxii4 #a47 1 1 8,anything that a ,gentile has lost is lawful1 for it is said1 #8,with all lost things of thy brother's4' 7,deut4 xxii4 #c47 ,and he that restores it transgresses a transgression1 for he strengthens the hands of the wicked of the world4 ,but if he restore it in order to sanctify the ,name1 that they may think well of ,israel1 and know that they are honest people1 this is praiseworthy40 ,in these passages 7and many more might be added if it were necessary7 it is plainly taught that an idolatrous ,gentile is not to be regarded as 8our neighbour10 or our brother4 ,we think1 then1 that we have fully proved that the ,jewish deputies in ,france1 and the compilers of the ,jewish ,catechism in ,bavaria1 did not learn their exposition of the command1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself10 from the ,talmud2 neither in the particular passage which they quote1 nor from the general principles of the ,talmudic system4 ,we have already stated our belief that they learned that exposition from the ,new ,testament1 for there it is taught plainly and repeatedly4 ,we quoted1 in proof1 a parable spoken by the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,we shall now add a few more passages in confirmation4 ,as to showing kindness to all our fellow-men1 the ,new ,testament teaches us to make no exception with regard to idolaters1 or others who have not the same creed1 but gives the following general rules3--8,as we have1 therefore1 opportunity1 let us do good ,,unto ,,all ,,men1 especially unto them that are of the household of faith40 7,gal4 vi4 #aj47 8,see that no man render evil for evil ,,unto ,,any ,,man2 but ever follow that which is good both among yourselves1 and ,,to ,,all ,,men40 7#a ,thess4 v4 #ae47 8,the ,lord make you to increase and abound ,,in ,,love one toward another1 and ,,toward ,,all ,,men40 7#a ,thess4 iii4 #ab47 ,you observe that in these general rules the ,new ,testament makes no reservation with respect to idolaters1 or epicureans1 or heretics1 or any other of those unfortunate beings whom the ,talmud outlaws from all the common charities of humanity4 ,it commands us to do good to all--and that not to avoid enmity1 nor for the sake of the ways of peace1 nor because we are afraid1 nor because we wish them to speak well of us1 and to be thought honest people1 but because it is our duty4 ,the ,new ,testament requires of its followers1 not only to abstain 8from active violence0 in injuring them1 but to do active good in assisting them1 and the examples1 which it proposes for our imitation1 are of the same character as the precepts which it imposes upon our obedience4 ,it sets before us ,jesus of ,nazareth1 whom the traditionists crucified1 praying for his murderers1 and saying1 8,father1 forgive them2 for they know not what they do0--and ,stephen1 his first martyr1 interceding for them that stoned him1 8,lord1 lay not this sin to their charge40 ,and ,paul1 whose feelings to those who differed from him in religion are thus expressed1 8,brethren1 my heart's desire and my prayer to ,god for ,israel is1 that they may be saved40 ,it sets before us the disciples of the ,lord ,jesus healing the diseases of all who applied1 without reference to their religious opinions4 7,acts xix4 #aa47 ,we repeat our question1 then1 which system is according to the truth and the will of ,god1 the ,talmud1 or the ,new ,testament8 ,your brethren in ,france and ,bavaria have declared1 by adopting the ,new ,testament exposition1 that it is right2 and by rejecting the intolerant principle which pervades the oral law1 that the oral law is wrong4 ,we trust that your hearts respond to their declarations4 ,but we do not rest the decision on the natural feelings of the heart1 we appeal to ,moses and the prophets4 ,the question is1 do the laws1 which ,god gave respecting the idolatrous nations of ,canaan1 apply to all other idolaters1 and under all circumstances8 ,the oral law answers this question in the affirmative1 and hence the source of all those revolting laws which we have just considered4 ,but the oral law is wrong3 #ast1 ,because it draws a general conclusion from a particular case1 which is contrary to all sound reasoning4 ,that the command to destroy these nations was peculiar appears from the command itself--,god does not speak generally of all the heathen1 but only of certain nations which he specifies--8,when the ,lord thy ,god shall bring thee into the land1 whither thou goest to possess it1 and hath cast out many nations before thee1 the ,hittites1 and the ,girgashites1 and the ,amorites1 and the ,canaanites1 and the ,perizzites1 and the ,hivites1 and the ,jebusites1 seven nations greater and mightier than thou2 and when the ,lord thy ,god shall deliver them before thee2 thou shalt smite them1 and utterly destroy them2 thou shalt make no covenant with1 nor shew mercy unto them40 7,deut4 vii4 #a1 #b47 ,here the command is precise1 and is as much violated by extending it to those to whom ,god has not extended it1 as by refusing to execute it on those whom ,he has here designated as the just victims of his wrath4 #b;dly1 ,the oral law is wrong in this general application1 for it contradicts the written law--,god expressly distinguishes between these and the other nations--8,when thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it1 then proclaim peace unto it4 ,and it shall be1 if it make thee answer of peace1 and open unto thee1 then it shall be1 that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee1 and they shall serve thee4444 ,thus shalt thou do unto all the cities which are very far from thee1 which are not of the cities of these nations4 ,but of the cities of these people1 which the ,lord thy ,god doth give thee for an inheritance1 thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth1 but thou shalt utterly destroy them2 the ,hittites1 and the ,amorites1 the ,canaanites1 and the ,perizzites1 the ,hivites1 and the ,jebusites2 as the ,lord thy ,god hath commanded thee40 7,deut4 xx4 #aj1 #ah47 ,in the first case ,god commands mercy--in the second1 extermination4 ,and if1 as in the first case1 he commands merciful dealing even to a nation at war with ,israel1 much more does he command it towards those1 with whom ,israel is not at war4 #c;dly1 ,the written law not only gives a general rule1 but lays down exceptions founded on certain principles4 8,thou shalt not abhor an ,edomite1 for he is thy brother2 thou shalt not abhor an ,egyptian1 because thou wast a stranger in his land40 7,deut4 xxiii4 #g47 ,now the ,egyptians were idolaters1 yet ,god commands the ,israelites not to abhor them1 and gives a reason which will now apply to most nations of the earth--8,because thou wast a stranger in his land40 ,suppose1 then1 that a ,rabbinist were to see an ,egyptian drowning1 is he to show him mercy8 ,to say1 ,no1 will contradict the written law2 and to say1 ,yes1 will overthrow the monstrous fabric of ,rabbinic legislation respecting idolaters4 #dthly1 ,the general practice of the ,israelites1 as described in the subsequent books of the ,old ,testament1 directly contradicts the oral law4 ,we have seen already that the ,prophet ,daniel did not hold the doctrine1 that no mercy was to be shown to an idolater4 ,when he knew of the judgment that was about to descend on ,nebuchadnezzar1 he was deeply distressed4 8,he was astonied for one hour1 and his thoughts troubled him20 and instead of leaving the idolater to perish1 he endeavoured to find means to ward off the calamity4 ,the prophet ,elisha was of the same mind3 when the idolatrous leper came to him for help1 he administered it1 and1 contrary to the ,talmudic command1 he administered it gratuitously2 and ,gehazi1 for acting in conformity to ,talmudic ordinance1 and making the idolater pay1 was smitten with the leprosy4 7#b ,kings v4 #bj47 ,in like manner1 when the ,syrian host was miraculously led into ,samaria1 and the ,king of ,israel proposed to act as a ,talmudist and smite them1 the man of ,god answered1 8,thou shalt not smite them2 wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken with thy sword and bow8 ,set bread and water before them1 that they may eat and drink and go to their master40 7#b ,kings vi4 #ba1 #bb47 ,this answer is important1 as it not only furnishes an example1 but exhibits the principle1 according to which idolatrous captives1 not ,canaanites1 were to be treated4 ,the prophet appeals to the general rule1 8,wouldest thou smite those whom thou hast taken captive with thy sword and bow8 ,even then1 as they are not ,canaanites1 they ought not to be smitten3 therefore1 in this case much more1 they ought to be treated with mercy40 ,we have still another instance of a prophet acting contrary to the oral law1 and in conformity with the ,new ,testament interpretation4 ,the prophet ,jonah once saw idolaters 8nigh unto death10 and ready to sink in the great deep1 but he had mercy on them1 and pointed out the means of deliverance4 ,when he fled from the presence of the ,lord1 the mariners in whose ship he sailed were idolaters2 for when the storm raged1 it is said1 8,they cried every man unto his god40 ,in their anguish they said unto him1 8,what shall we do unto thee1 that the sea may be calm unto us80 ,in other words1 8,what shall we do to save our lives80 ,now if ,jonah had been a ,talmudist1 it would have been plainly not his duty to have told them1 but to have allowed the sea to rage on until the ship went to pieces1 and he had the satisfaction of seeing the idolaters go to the bottom4 ,this would have been an act of obedience to a precise command1 and could have made no difference to ,jonah4 ,for1 as to himself1 there are two suppositions possible1 either he knew that the ,lord had prepared a fish to swallow him1 or he knew it not4 ,if he knew it1 then he was secure of his own safety1 and would have known that the fish could find him out just as readily if the ship went to pieces1 as if the idolaters threw him into the sea4 ,it would1 therefore1 have been doubly his duty to conceal from the idolaters the means of deliverance4 ,on this supposition1 ,jonah's counsel to them can only be accounted for on the principle that he was not a ,talmudist1 but considered it his duty to save the lives of perishing idolaters1 even when nothing was to be feared or to be gained4 ,if1 on the other hand1 he did not know of the fish1 he must have expected a watery grave1 whether the idolaters threw him into the sea1 or whether he waited until the ship went to pieces4 ,in this case1 also1 if a ,talmudist1 it would have been his duly to have staged where he was1 and if he perished1 die in the fulfilment or the command1 to show no mercy to idolaters4 ,but he did not--he had compassion on them1 and1 to save their lives1 relinquished his only chance of safety1 by telling them to throw him into the sea4 ,it is plain1 therefore1 ,jonah was not a ,talmudist4 ,we have here1 then1 three inspired prophets1 ,daniel1 ,elisha1 and ,jonah1 all bearing a practical testimony against the ,talmudic principle1 which extends ,god's law against the ,canaanites to all idolaters1 and under all circumstances4 ,lastly1 ,we have the testimony of the ,god of ,israel himself4 ,he who gave the command to destroy the ,canaanites on account of their exceeding wickedness1 shows by his own dealings with the world1 that this case is an exception to the general rule1 for 8,the ,lord is good to all1 and his mercies are over all his works40 ,he provides food and clothing for the idolater1 as well as for those who worship him in truth2 or1 as the ,new ,testament says1 8,he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good1 and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust40 7,matt4 vi4 #de47 ,he1 then1 whose conduct most resembles that of his ,creator1 is1 beyond all doubt1 the nearest to the truth4 ,the ,talmud1 therefore1 is wrong1 and the ,new ,testament explanation of the command1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself10 is right4 ,we ask the ,jews1 then1 to account for this fact1 that ,jesus of ,nazareth was right1 and those who condemned him wrong1 respecting one-half of the whole law4 ,and we ask1 moreover1 those ,jews who abhor the above ,talmudic principles1 how they can conscientiously join in the synagogue prayers1 which ascribe to the ,talmud ,divine authority8 ,we ask them why1 at the very least1 they have never publicly protested against these enormities2 but allow their brethren through the world to remain victims to a system1 which not only contradicts the written law of ,god1 but outrages all the better feelings of even fallen humanity8 ,footnote #aa3 ,hilchoth ,rotzeach1 c4 xii4 #ae4 ,see also ,bava ,bathra1 fol4 iv4 col4 #a41 about the middle of the page1 where the punishment of ,daniel is more fully discussed4 ,no4 ,,vi4 ,,compulsory ,,conversion ,,of ,,the ,,gentiles4 ,when1 at the close of the fifteenth century1 the ,jews were driven out of ,spain1 some of the magnanimous exiles1 who had preferred loss of all things to a compulsory change of religion1 arrived at the frontiers of ,portugal1 and there sought an asylum4 ,a permanent abode was refused1 and a temporary sojourn was granted them on two conditions--#ast1 ,that each should pay a certain quantity of gold for his admission2 and #b;dly1 ,that if they were found in ,portugal after a certain day1 they should either consent to be baptized1 or be sold for slaves4#ab ,now ,jews of every degree and shade of religious belief will agree with us1 that these conditions were most disgraceful to those who imposed them4 ,to refuse gratuitous assistance to the poor and needy1 merely because they had been brought up in a different religious faith1 was utterly unworthy of those professing faith in ,divine revelation4 ,to compel the unfortunate to choose between loss of liberty or of conscience was the act of a fiend4 ,but now suppose that the ,portuguese had endeavoured to persuade these poor exiles that their conduct1 however base it might appear1 was commanded by ,god himself4 ,suppose1 further1 that when called upon to prove that this command was from ,god1 they had confessed that no such command was to be found in the written books of their religion1 that it was only a tradition of their oral law1 do you think that the ,jewish exiles would have been satisfied with such proof1 and submitted8 ,would they not1 in the first place1 have questioned the authority of a command resting merely upon uncertain tradition8 ,and would they not have argued1 from the detestable nature of the command itself1 that it could not possibly emanate from the ,god of truth and love8 ,we ask you then to apply these principles to the oral law4 ,the ,portuguese refused to perform an act of humanity to the unfortunate ,jewish exiles1 unless they were paid for it4 ,your oral law1 as we showed in our last number1 forbids you to give medical advice to a sick idolater gratuitously4 ,the ,portuguese voluntarily undertook to convert the ,jews by force4 ,your oral law teaches compulsory conversion as a ,divine command4 ,if the oral law could be enforced1 liberty of conscience would be at an end4 ,neither ,jew nor ,gentile would be permitted to exercise the judgment1 which ,god has given him4 ,his only alternative would be submission to ,rabbinic authority1 or death4 ,the dreadful command to kill1 by any means1 those ,israelites who have become epicureans1 or idolaters1 or apostates1 is well known1#ac and sufficiently proves that the oral law recognises no such thing as liberty of conscience in ,israel4 ,it pronounces a man an apostate if he denies its ,divine authority1 and demands his life as the penalty4 ,the execution of this one command would fill the world with blood and horror2 and recall all the worst features of inquisitorial tyranny4 ,not now to mention those ,israelites who have embraced ,christianity1 there are in ,england1 and every part of ,europe1 many high-minded and honourable ,jews1 who have practically renounced the authority of the oral law4 ,the ,rabbinical millennium would commence by handing over all such to the executioner4 ,their talents1 their virtue1 their learning1 their moral excellence1 would avail nothing4 ,found guilty of epicureanism or apostasy1 because they dared to think for themselves1 and to act according to their convictions1 they would have to undergo the epicurean's or the apostate's fate4 ,such is the toleration of the oral law towards native ,israelites1 but it is equally severe to converts4 ,it allows no second thoughts4 ,it legislates for relapsed converts1 as the ,spanish ,inquisition did for those ,jews who1 after embracing ,christianity1 returned to their former faith and sentences all such to death4 1 1 1 8,a ,noahite who has become a proselyte1 and been circumcised and baptized1 and afterwards wishes to return from after the ,lord1 and to be only a sojourning proselyte1 as he was before1 is not to be listened to--on the contrary1 either let him be an ,israelite in everything1 or let him be put to death40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 x4 #c47 ,in this law there is an extraordinary severity4 ,the oral law admits that a ,noahite1 that is1 a heathen who has taken upon himself the seven commandments of the children of ,noah1 may be saved4 ,it cannot1 therefore1 be said that the severity was dictated by a wish to deter men from error1 and to restrain them from rushing upon everlasting ruin1 as the ,inquisition pleads4 ,the oral law goes a little further1 and not only will not permit a man to change his creed1 but will not even suffer him to change his ceremonial observances4 ,though the man should commit no crime1 and though he should continue to worship the one true ,god1 in spirit and in truth1 yet if he only alter the outward forms of his religion1 modern ,judaism requires that he should be put to death4 ,but the tender care of the oral law is not limited to the narrow confines of ,judaism1 it extends also to the heathen1 amongst whom it directs the true faith to be propagated by the sword4 ,first1 it gives a particular rule4 ,in case of war with the ,gentiles1 it commands the ,jews to offer peace on two conditions--the one that they should become tributaries1 the other that they should renounce idolatry and take upon them the seven precepts of the ,noahites1 and then adds-- 1 8,but if they will not make peace1 or if they will make peace but will not take upon them the seven commandments1 the war is to be carried on against them1 and all the adult males are to be put to death2 and their property and their little ones are to be taken as plunder4 ,but no woman or male infant is to be put to death1 for it is said1 #8,the women and the little ones' 7,deut4 xx4 #ad471 and here little ones mean male infants40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 vi4 #d47 ,now what difference1 we would ask1 is there between the conduct here prescribed1 and that actually practised by the ,portuguese1 at the period above referred to1 and thus described by a ,jew3#ad--8;,at the expiration of the appointed time1 most of the ,jews had emigrated1 but many still remained in the country4 ,the ,king therefore gave orders to take away from them all their children under fourteen years of age1 to distribute them amongst ,christians1 to send them to the newly-discovered islands1 and thus to pluck up ,judaism by the roots4 ,dreadful was the cry of lamentation uttered by the parents1 but the unfortunates found no mercy40 ,do you condemn this conduct in the ,portuguese8 ,be then consistent1 and condemn it in the ,talmud too4 ,as for ourselves1 we abhor it as much1 yea more1 in those calling themselves ,christians1 ,we look upon the actors in that transaction as a disgrace to the ,christian name1 and the deed itself as a foul blot upon the history of ,christendom4 ,but we cannot help thinking that1 dreadful and detestable as this mode of conversion is1 it pleased ,god in his providence to suffer wicked men thus to persecute ,israel1 that the ,jews might have a practical experience of the wickedness of the oral law1 and thus be led to reject such persecuting principles4 ,the ,jewish nation rejected the ,lord ,jesus ,christ1 and preferred the oral law4 ,this law1 not dictated by a spirit of retaliation upon the ,portuguese1 but invented by the ,pharisees centuries before ,portugal was a kingdom1 commanded the ,jews to convert the heathen by force1 to murder all who would not consent to be thus converted1 and to take away the children4 ,and ,god suffered them to fall into the hands of men of similar principles1 who took away their children1 attempted to convert themselves by force1 and sold for slaves the ,jews who refused to be thus converted2 so that the very misfortunes of the nation testify aloud against those traditions which they preferred to the ,word of ,god4 ,but perhaps some ,jew will say that this is only a particular command1 referring to the nations in the vicinity of the land of ,israel4 ,we reply1 that the command to convert the heathen by force1 is not particular1 but general1 referring to the whole world4 ,if the ,jews had the power1 this is the conduct which they are to pursue towards all the nations of the earth4 1 8,and thus ,moses our master1 has commanded us1 by ,divine tradition1 to compel all that come into the world to take upon themselves the commandments imposed upon the sons of ,noah1 and whosoever will not receive them is to be put to death40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 viii4 #d47 ,such is the ,talmudic system of toleration1 and such the means which it prescribes for the conversion of the world4 ,we acknowledge that persons calling themselves ,christians have had an oral law very similar in its principles and precepts1 but we fearlessly challenge the whole world to point out anything similar in the doctrines of ,jesus ,christ1 or in the writings of his apostles4 ,the ,new ,testament does1 indeed1 teach us to seek the conversion of the world1 not by force of arms1 but by teaching the truth4 8,go ye1 therefore1 and make disciples of all nations1 baptizing them in the name of the ,father1 and of the ,son1 and of the ,holy ,ghost2 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever ,i have commanded you40 7,matt4 xxviii4 #ai47 ,in the parable of the tares and wheat1 ,jesus of ,nazareth hath expressly taught us that physical force is not to be employed in order to remove moral error4 ,the servants are represented as asking the master of the house1 whether they should go and root out the tares that grew amongst the wheat1 but the answer is1 8,nay1 lest while ye gather up the tares1 ye root up also the wheat with them4 ,let both grow together until the harvest2 and in the time of harvest ,i will say to the reapers1 ,gather ye together first the tares1 and bind them in bundles to burn them3 but gather the wheat into my barn40 7,matt4 xiii4 #bd-dc47 ,he tells us expressly to have nothing to do with the sword1 8,for all they that take the sword1 shall perish with the sword40 7,matt4 xxvi4 #eb47 ,and therefore the apostle says1 8,the weapons of our warfare are not carnal1 but mighty through ,god to the pulling down of strong holds40 7#b ,cor4 x4 #d47 ,here again1 then1 there is a great difference between the oral law and the ,new ,testament4 ,the former commands that the truth be maintained and propagated by the sword4 ,the latter tells us that 8faith cometh by hearing1 and hearing by the ,word of ,god40 ,which1 then1 is most agreeable to the doctrine of ,moses and the prophets8 ,we answer fearlessly1 the means prescribed by the ,new ,testament1 for-- #ast1 ,no instance can be adduced from the ,old ,testament1 in which ,god commanded the propagation of the truth by the power of the sword4 ,the extirpation of the seven nations of ,canaan is not in point1 for the ,israelites were not commanded to make them any offer of mercy on condition of conversion4 ,the measure of their iniquity was full1 and therefore the command to destroy every soul absolute4 ,neither in the command referred to by ,maimonides is there the least reference to conversion4 ,it simply says1 8,when thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it1 then proclaim peace unto it4 ,and it shall be if it make thee answer of peace1 and open unto thee1 then it shall be that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee1 and they shall serve thee4 ,and if it will make no peace with thee1 but will make war against thee1 then thou shalt besiege it3 and when the ,lord thy ,god hath delivered it into thine hands1 thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword4 ,but the women and the little ones1 and the cattle1 and all that is in the city1 even all the spoil thereof1 shalt thou take unto thyself40 7,deut4 xx4 #aj-ad47 ,here is not one word said about conversion1 or about the seven commandments of the sons of ,noah4 ,the command itself is hypothetical1 8,when thou comest nigh unto a city20 and therefore gives no colour nor pretext for setting out on a war of conversion1 8to compel all that come into the world40 ,as it stands1 it is a humane and merciful direction to restrain the horrors of the then prevailing system of warfare2 and beautifully exemplifies the value which ,god sets upon the life of man1 whatever his nation or his religion4 ,he will not suffer it to be destroyed unnecessarily2 and even in case of extremity1 he commands the lives of the women and the children1 who never bore arms against ,israel1 to be spared4 ,there is not a syllable about forcing their consciences3 that is all pure gratuitous addition of the oral law1 which turns a merciful command into an occasion of bigotry and religious tyranny4 #b;dly1 ,as ,god has given no command to propagate religion by the sword1 so neither has ,he given any countenance to such doctrine1 by the instrumentality which ,he has employed for the preservation of religion in the world4 ,he did not choose a mighty nation of soldiers as the depositories of his truth1 nor any of the overturners of kingdoms for his prophets4 ,if it had been his intention to convert the world by force of arms1 ,nimrod would have been a more suitable instrument than ,abraham1 and the mighty kingdom of ,egypt more fitted for the task than the family of ,hebrew captives4 ,but by the very choice ,he showed1 that truth was to be propagated by ,divine power working conviction in the minds of men1 and not by physical strength4 ,it would have been just as easy for him to have turned every ,hebrew captive in ,egypt into a ,samson1 as to turn the waters into blood2 and to have sent them into the world to overturn idolatry by brute force2 but ,he preferred to enlighten the minds of men by exhibiting a series of miracles1 calculated to convince them of his eternal power and ,godhead4 ,when the ten tribes revolted1 and fell away into idolatry1 ,he did not employ the sword of ,judah1 but the voice of his prophets1 to recall them to the truth4 ,he did not compel them1 as the oral law would have done1 to an outward profession1 but dealt with them as with rational beings1 and left them to the choice of their hearts4 ,nineveh was not converted by ,jewish soldiers1 but by the preaching of ,jonah4 ,so far is ,god from commanding the propagation of religion by the sword1 that ,he would not even suffer a man of war to build a temple for his worship4 ,when ,david thought of erecting a temple1 the ,lord said unto him1 8,thou hast shed blood abundantly1 and hast made great wars2 thou shalt not build an house unto my name1 because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth40 7#a ,chron4 xxii4 #h47 ,thus hath ,god shown his abhorrence of compulsory conversion1 and in all his dealings confirmed his ,word1 8,not by might nor by power1 but by my ,spirit1 saith the ,lord of hosts40 7,zech4 iv4 #f47 #c;dly1 ,god has in his ,word promised the conversion of the world1 but not by the means prescribed in the oral law4 ,his promise to ,abraham was1 8,in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed40 7,gen4 xxii4 #ah47 ,now this can hardly mean that his descendants are to treat all nations1 as the ,portuguese treated the ,jews4 ,the #gbnd ,psalm gives rather a different view of the fulfilment of this promise4 ,it promises not a victorious soldier like ,mahomet1 but one 8in whose days the righteous shall flourish1 and abundance of peace so long as the moon endureth4444 ,all nations shall call ,him blessed40 ,the prophet ,isaiah tells us 8that out of ,zion shall go forth 7not conquering armies to compel1 but7 the law1 and the ,word of the ,lord from ,jerusalem4 ,and he shall judge among the nations1 and rebuke many people2 and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares1 and their spears into pruning-hooks2 nation shall not lift up sword against nation1 neither shall they learn war any more40 ,zechariah says1 8,he shall speak peace to the heathen20 and declares that the conversion of the world will not be the reward of conquest1 but the result of conviction4 8,in those days it shall come to pass1 that ten men shall take hold1 out of all the languages of the nations1 even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a ,jew1 saying1 ,we will go with you1 for we have heard that ,god is with you40 7,zech4 viii4 #bc47 ,here again1 then1 you see that whilst the oral law differs from ,moses and the prophets1 the ,new ,testament agrees with them4 ,account1 then1 for this extraordinary fact1 that whilst the whole ,jewish nation lost the great and glorious doctrine of liberty of conscience1 it has been preserved for you and for all mankind by ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,just suppose that the principles of the ,talmud had triumphed1 either amongst the ,jews or the ,portuguese1 what would have been the consequence to the world8 ,if the ,talmudists had attained to supreme power1 we should have had to choose between compulsory conversion and the sword4 ,if the ,portuguese had attained to universal dominion1 both you and we should have had the alternative of compulsory conversion or the fires of the ,inquisition4 ,in either case1 the noblest and most precious gift that the ,god of heaven ever sent down to earth1 liberty of conscience1 would have been extinct4 ,but1 thank ,god1 the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth has triumphed over the oral laws of both ,jews and ,portuguese1 and the result is1 that both you and we have the liberty of worshipping ,god according to the convictions of our understanding and the dictates of our conscience4 ,behold1 then1 how you are indebted to ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,without him you would not have known religious liberty1 either theoretically or practically4 ,he is right on this all-important point1 whilst those who condemned him to death and rejected his claims are wrong4 ,if he was not the true ,messiah1 but only a pretender1 how is it that ,god has made him and his doctrine the exclusive channel for preserving the truth of his ,word1 and conveying such blessings to you as well as to us ,gentiles8 ,if the ,pharisees were right in rejecting him1 how is it that ,god has rewarded their piety by giving them over to such gross delusions1 and making them the transmitters of doctrines1 which would fill the world with blood and hatred and discord1 and make even the truth odious in the eyes of all mankind8 ,for ourselves we cannot help coming to the conclusion1 that ,he who has taught us mercy and love to all men1 and delivered both you and us from such horrors--and who1 in doing this1 rose above all the doctrines of his nation and his times1 was taught of ,god1 and is1 therefore1 the true ,messiah1 the ,saviour of the world4 ,certain it is1 that this doctrine has already been a blessing to the world2 and that until your nation embrace its principles1 at least on this one point of love and toleration1 it is impossible that the promised glory and pre-eminence of the ,jewish nation should come4 ,with such principles as are inculcated in the oral law1 a restoration to the land of your forefathers would be no blessing4 ,it would only realize all the legislative and religious speculations of the ,talmudists1 and arm them with the power to tyrannize over their more enlightened brethren4 ,it would be the triumph of tradition over the ,word of ,god1 and that the ,god of truth will not permit4 ,it would be to instal the spirit of intolerance and persecution on the throne of love and charity1 and that ,god will not suffer4 ,the ,talmud is1 thus1 a main obstacle in the way of ,god's fulfilling his promises to the nation1 because it incapacitates ,israel for the reception or the right employment of the promised blessings4 ,is it not1 then1 the duty of all ,jews who desire and long for the glory and the happiness which ,god has promised1 to lift up their voice with power1 and to protest against that system which prevents the fulfilment of ,god's promises2 and by all lawful means to endeavour to deliver their brethren from the bondage of such intolerance8 ,footnote #ab3 ,jost4 volume vii4 p4 #ia4 ,footnote #ac3 ,hilchoth ,rotzeach1 c4 iv4 #aj4 ,footnote #ad3 ,dr4 ,jost's ,geschichte der ,israeliten1 vol4 vii4 p4 #ic4 ,no4 ,,vii4 ,,the ,,feast ,,of ,,purim4 ,the feast of ,purim now at hand1 recalls to the ,jewish recollection one of those miraculous deliverances1 with which the history of ,israel abounds4 ,the narrative of the institution1 as contained in the ,bible1 is a signal proof and illustration of the superintending providence of ,god1 instructive to all the world1 but calling peculiarly for the gratitude and praise of the ,jewish nation1 whose forefathers were then delivered4 ,and it is much to the honour of their posterity that they have not suffered the lapse of more than twenty centuries to wear out the memory of this great event1 but that to this day they observe its anniversary with alacrity and zeal4 ,if the oral law simply contented itself with commanding the observance and prescribing the mode of worship for such an important season1 we should have no fault to find2 but the oral law claims for itself ,divine origin and authority1 anathematizes any denial of these claims as heresy1 and sentences the heretic to death4 ,we are1 therefore1 compelled to examine its pretensions1 and to scrutinize its features1 in order to see whether they really bear the stamp of divinity4 ,we have already pointed out some1 that savoured more of earth than heaven3 the constitutions for the feast of ,purim may be traced to the same source4 ,the following law respecting the meal to be provided on this occasion did certainly not come to man from heaven3-- 1 8,a man's duty with regard to the feast is1 that he should eat meat and prepare a suitable feast according to his means2 and drink wine1 until he be drunk1 and fell asleep in his drunkenness40 7,hilchoth ,megillah1 c4 ii4 #ae47 ,the ,talmud1 however1 is not satisfied with so indefinite a direction1 but lays down1 with its usual precision1 the exact measure of intoxication required4 8,a man is bound to get so drunk with wine at ,purim1 as not to know the difference between ,cursed is ,haman1 and ,blessed is ,mordecai40 7,megillah1 fol4 #g1 col4 #b47 ,but perhaps some learned champion of the ,talmud will fly to that sort of refuge for destitute commentators1 the parabolic language of the orient1 and tell us that this precept is not to be understood literally but figuratively2 and that so far from recommending intoxication1 it means to inculcate excess of sobriety or devotion1 such abstraction of the senses1 from all outward objects1 as not to distinguish between cursed is ,haman and blessed is ,mordecai4 ,this sort of defence is neither imaginary nor novel4 ,in this way ,rabbi ,eliezer's permission to split open an unlearned man like a fish has been made to signify the spiritual opening of the understanding1 and of course the overweening anxiety of the ,rabbies to communicate instruction to the ignorant4 ,but however we dull ,gentiles may be enlightened by such an exposition1 we much doubt whether the greatest amhaaretz in ,israel will believe the interpretation4 ,the great and learned ,rabbies ,solomon ,jarchi and ,moses ,maimonides have understood literal drunkenness1 and have named wine as the legitimate liquor4 ,r4 ,joseph ,karo has simply given the command verbatim as it stands in the ,talmud1 but a note in the ,orach ,chaiim shows1 that some of the modern ,rabbies were not able to swallow such a command1 and1 therefore1 say that an ,israelite does his duty1 if he only drink a little more than usual4 ,the ,talmud itself admits of no such softening down1 nor explaining away1 for immediately after the precept it goes on to propose an example and to furnish an illustration of its meaning in the following history of the very ,rabbi1 on whose authority this traditional command rests2-- 1 1 8,rabba and ,rabbi ,zira made their ,purim entertainment together4 ,when ,rabba got drunk1 he arose and killed ,rabbi ,zira4 ,on the following day he prayed for mercy1 and restored him to life4 ,the following year ,rabba proposed to him again to make their ,purim entertainment together1 but he answered1 #8,miracles don't happen every day4'0 7,talmud1 ,tr4 ,megillah1 fol4 #g1 col4 #b47 ,this history of one of the men who are authorities for the above ,talmudic command to get drunk1 plainly illustrates its meaning1 and shows that the ,talmud meant and commanded its followers to drink wine to excess on this occasion4 ,it sets before them the example of one of the greatest ,rabbies committing murder in his drunkenness1 and so far from reprobating this sin1 it gravely tells us that ,god interposed by a miracle to prevent the ill-consequences2 and that the ,rabbi1 far from being cured of his propensity1 or making any declaration of his intention to amend1 continued in that state of mind1 that his colleague found it imprudent to trust himself at his table4 ,now every body that is acquainted with the ,jews1 knows that they are a temperate and sober people2 and because they are so1 we ask them whether the above command can be from ,god8 and whether they believe that the ,talmud speaks truth in giving the above narrative8 ,it says not merely that men may get drunk with impunity1 but that to get drunk is an act of piety1 and obedience to a command6 ,here1 again1 the ,talmud is directly at issue with the ,new ,testament1 which says1 8,be not drunk with wine1 wherein is excess40 7,ephes4 v4 #ah47 8,take heed to yourselves1 lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting1 and drunkenness1 and the cares of this life1 and so that day come upon you unawares40 7,luke xxi4 #cd47 ,the ,new ,testament holds out to us no hope1 that if in our drunkenness1 we should commit murder1 a miracle will be wrought in order to deliver us from the consequences2 but tells us1 that 8neither murderers nor drunkards shall inherit the kingdom of ,god40 7#a ,cor4 vi4 #i1 #aj47 ,now which of these two doctrines is the most agreeable to the revealed will of ,god8 ,how would you desire to meet death1 if death should come upon the feast of ,purim8 ,would you wish the angel of death to find you1 in obedience to the oral law1 insensible from overmuch wine8 or in that state of sobriety and thoughtfulness prescribed by ,jesus of ,nazareth8 ,does not the inward tribunal of the heart decide that ,jesus of ,nazareth is right1 and that the ,talmud is wrong8 ,and does not the ,old ,testament confirm the sentence8 ,isaiah says1 8,woe unto them that rise up early in the morning1 that they may follow strong drink2 that continue until night1 till wine inflame them6 and the harp and the viol1 the tabret and pipe1 and wine are in their feasts2 but they regard not the work of the ,lord1 neither consider the operation of his hands4 ,therefore my people are gone into captivity1 because they have no knowledge2 and their honourable men are famished1 and their multitude dried up with thirst40 7,isaiah v4 #aa-ac47 ,and so ,moses commands the parents that should they have a son 8a glutton and a drunkard10 to bring him to justice1 and to have him stoned4 7,deut4 xxi4 #bj47 ,the ,talmud1 then1 manifestly contradicts the ,old ,testament2 it therefore cannot speak truth when it narrates that ,god wrought a miracle in order to save a drunkard and a murderer from that punishment1 which ,he had himself commanded to be visited upon either of these crimes4 ,the story of the miracle is therefore a palpable falsehood1 contradictory to the law of ,moses1 and derogatory to the honour of ,god4 ,how1 then1 can the ,talmud be of ,god8 ,if you attempt to distinguish1 as some do1 between the ,talmud and the oral law1 and say that though the ,talmud contains the oral law1 yet it is not all inspired1 then we ask1 how can you rely upon the testimony of a witness convicted of wilful1 gross1 and flagrant falsehood8 ,if you do not believe in the above miracle of the drunken ,rabba1 you denounce it as a liar4 ,if it lie1 then1 upon this solemn occasion in relating a miracle1 in handing down the law of ,god1 how can you depend upon it at all8 ,if it does not scruple to forge miracles1 what warrant have you for believing that it does not forge laws also8 ,but suppose1 which is far more probable1 that ,rabbi ,zira1 when killed by ,rabba1 had not come to life again1 would ,rabba1 in the eye of the modern ,jewish law1 be considered as a murderer1 and guilty of death1 or as an innocent person1 who might safely be permitted to go at large1 and pursue his usual avocations8 ,this is a question well deserving an answer from some of your learned men1 and naturally suggested by some principles asserted and implied in the following decisions of the oral law3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,the reading of the ,megillah 7the book of ,esther7 in its time is an affirmative precept according to the words of the scribes1 and it is known that this is an ordinance of the ,prophets4 ,the obligation to read it rests upon all1 men1 women1 and proselytes1 and manumitted slaves4 ,children also are to be accustomed to the reading of it4 ,even priests in their service are to neglect their service1 and to come to hear the reading of the ,megillah4 ,in like manner the study of the law is to be omitted1 in order to hear the reading of the ,megillah1 and a fortiori all the remaining commandments of the law1 all of which give way to the reading of the ,megillah3 but there is nothing to which the reading of the ,megillah gives way1 except that particular class of dead person called the dead of the commandment1 who has none to bury him4 ,he that happens upon him is first to bury him1 and afterwards to read40 7,hilchoth ,megillah1 c4 i4 #a47 ,on this extract we have several remarks to make1 but at present we request the attention of our readers to the reason given why the reading of the ,megillah is more important than any of the commandments4 ,it is this4 ,according to the oral law1 8the study of the law is equivalent to all the commandments1 and the other commandments are to give way to this study40 ,but according to the passage before us1 the study of the law is to give way to the reading of the ,megillah4 ,the reading of the ,megillah1 therefore1 being greater than the greatest of the commandments1 is of course greater than all the inferior ones4 ,now apply this reasoning to the above command to get drunk1 and you will prove that getting drunk at ,purim feast is the greatest of all the commandments4 ,in order to get drunk1 it is plain that the study of the law must give way4 ,the man who cannot distinguish between 8,cursed be ,haman and blessed be ,mordecai10 certainly cannot study1 neither can he bury the dead4 ,the commandment1 therefore1 to which the study of the law and the burying of the dead give way1 must be the greatest of all the commandments2 i4e41 the getting drunk on ,purim is the greatest of all the commandments4 ,this conclusion1 which inevitably follows upon ,talmudic principles1 necessarily shows that those principles are false4 ,but that is not the object for which ,i have exhibited this conclusion2 it is with reference to the case of ,rabba above-mentioned4 ,having got drunk according as the oral law commanded1 and having thereby obeyed the greatest of the commandments1 and one to which all others are necessarily in abeyance1 was he guilty or innocent in having murdered ,r4 ,zira8 ,it certainly seems a very hard case to condemn him to death for an act1 which resulted from his obedience to the greatest of all the commandments4 ,he might urge that he had a great dislike to drunkenness--that he had overcome his natural aversion simply to satisfy the ,rabbinical requirements--that by the time that he had arrived at the prescribed incompetency to distinguish between ,haman and ,mordecai1 he had lost all power of distinguishing between right and wrong--that1 therefore1 he had not done it with malice propense2 what sentence1 therefore1 does the ,talmud pronounce against a murderer of this sort8 ,if ,rabba was allowed to go at large1 as would appear from his invitation to ,rabbi ,zira the following year1 a repetition of the same offence was possible1 a repetition of the miracle in ,r4 ,zira's opinion highly improbable4 ,thus ,rabba might go on from year to year killing one or more with impunity1 and would be a far more dangerous neighbour than 8the ox that was wont to push with his horn40 ,if1 on the other hand1 he is to be punished capitally1 then the oral law is plainly not from ,god2 for obedience to the greatest of its commandments makes it possible for a man to commit the greatest of crimes1 and to subject himself to the extremity of punishment4 ,but we object1 secondly1 to the exaltation of a mere human ordinance above the ,word of ,god4 ,the reading of the book of ,esther at the feast of ,purim1 is no doubt a very appropriate1 and may be a very profitable exercise4 ,but it is confessedly of human appointment4 ,it is of the words of the scribes2 the time and the mode are altogether ,rabbinical ordinances4 ,why1 then1 8are all the remaining commandments of the law to give way to the reading of the ,megillah80 ,the priest was to neglect the service to which ,god had appointed him1 in order to obey a mere human institution4 ,and the ,israelites to neglect the duties of love and charity1 to fulfil a mere ceremonial commandment4 ,here is a plain token that the oral law is not from ,god1 but is the offspring of human invention and superstition4 ,the human mind exalts ceremonies above moral duties4 ,god declares that all outward observances are secondary4 8,i desired mercy and not sacrifice1 and the knowledge of ,god more than burnt offerings40 7,hos4 vi4 #f47 8,he hath showed thee1 ,o man1 what is good2 and what doth the ,lord require of thee1 but to do justly1 and to love mercy1 and to walk numbly with thy ,god80 7,mic4 vi4 #h47 ,and so the ,new ,testament says in the very same spirit1 8,the first of all the commandments is1 ,hear ,o ,israel3 the ,lord our ,god is one ,lord1 and thou shalt love the ,lord thy ,god with all thy heart1 c4 ,this is the first commandment4 ,and the second is like1 namely this1 ,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself4 ,there is none other commandment greater than these40 7,mark4 xii4 #bi-ca47 ,the oral law1 on the contrary1 tells us that 8all the commandments1 except the burying of the dead1 are to give way to the reading of the ,megillah10 to a mere ceremony2 and that not even of ,god's appointment4 ,god prefers mercy before the sacrifices which ,he himself has instituted4 ,the ,talmud prefers a human institution to all ,god's commandments4 ,a more striking instance of genuine superstition1 and a stronger proof of the human origin of the oral law cannot be found4 ,the book of ,esther appears to have been a peculiar favourite of the ,rabbies4 ,the reading of it takes precedence of all other duties but one1 and is considered as obligatory1 even upon the women1 who are declared exempt from the study of the law4 ,it is true that it contains a very notable warning for disobedient wives1 and a striking instance of the deliverance of ,israel by the instrumentality of a woman2 but when we consider that the name of ,god does not occur once in the whole book1 and that the law contains the account of man's creation and fall1 the ten commandments1 the deliverance from ,egypt1 and all those events of primary interest to women as well as men1 it becomes of some importance to consider why the women1 who are not bound to study the law of ,god1 are bound to read the book of ,esther4 ,the authors of the oral law appear to have attached uncommon importance to this book1 as appears from this circumstance1 and still more so from the following startling declaration of ,maimonides3-- 1 8,all the books of the prophets1 and all the ,hagiographa1 except the roll of ,esther1 will cease in the days of ,messiah4 ,but it is perpetual as the five books of the written law1 and the constitutions of the oral law1 which shall never cease40 7,hilchoth ,megillah47 ,some of the ,rabbies say that this is to be taken conditionally1 8although they were all to cease1 yet this would not cease40 ,but this still attributes a decided superiority to the book of ,esther above all the other books4 ,what then is there in it1 that gives this book such a peculiar favour1 and makes the history of ,esther more important than that of the conquest of ,canaan1 or of the glory of ,solomon1 or of the restoration of the house of the ,lord8 ,is there more devotion and piety to be found in it than in the ,psalms of ,david8 ,does it contain more wisdom than the ,proverbs of ,solomon8 ,is there a sublimer flight of ,divine poetry1 a more heavenly afflatus than in the visions of ,isaiah8 ,a more open revelation of the mysteries of the ,deity than is to be found in ,job1 or ,daniel1 or ,ezekiel8 ,why do the ,rabbies pronounce it worthy of preservation1 whilst they contemplate without emotion the loss of all the other books8 ,we cannot possibly discover1 unless it be that it furnishes more gratification to the spirit of revenge so natural to all the children of ,adam1 whether they be ,jew or ,gentile4 ,to forgive is to be like ,god--and ,god alone can teach forgiveness either speculatively or practically4 ,but the book of ,esther contains an account of the revenge which the ,jews took upon their enemies1 not like the destruction of the ,canaanites1 fulfilling the commands of ,god upon ,his enemies1 but taking personal and individual revenge on their own4 ,and this very fact may be one reason why ,god did not permit his most holy name to occur in the whole book--just as he did not permit ,david to build him a temple1 so he would not have his name associated with deeds of personal revenge4 ,but1 however that be1 we can discover no other reason for the decided preference which the oral law gives to the book of ,esther4 ,and we think that after the specimens which we have already given of their spirit towards idolaters we do them no injustice2 especially as1 in this particular case1 the oral law breathes this spirit aloud4 1 1 8,it is necessary to say1 ,cursed be ,haman1 ,blessed be ,mordecai1 ,cursed be ,zeresh1 ,blessed be ,esther1 ,cursed be all idolaters1 ,blessed be all ,israel40 7,orach ,chaiim1 sec4 #fij47 ,why this is necessary1 is not told us4 ,it appears not to bring glory to ,god1 nor any blessing to man4 ,haman and ,zeresh have long since passed into eternity1 and received from the just ,judge the reward of their deeds4 ,mordecai and ,esther have in like manner appeared before the ,god of ,israel1 and received according to their faith4 ,to these1 then1 the voice of human praise or reproach is as nothing4 ,but to curse a dead enemy1 to pursue with unrelenting hatred those who have already fallen into the hands of the living ,god1 is certainly not a ,divine ordinance1 and cannot be an acceptable act of worship in poor sinners1 who themselves stand so much in need of forgiveness4 ,to curse the dead is bad1 but to curse the living is1 in one sense1 still worse4 8,cursed be all idolaters40 ,according to our calculation1 there are #fjj millions of idolaters--according to the ,jewish account1 there must be more4 ,why1 then1 should they be cursed8 ,that will not convert them from the error of their ways4 ,it will not make them more happy1 either in this world or in the next4 ,we are not aware1 even if ,god were to hear this execration and curse the idolatrous world1 that it would be productive of any blessing to ,israel4 ,why make a day of thanksgiving for mercies received an opportunity of invoking curses upon the majority of mankind8 ,the ,word of ,god teaches a very different petition for the heathen4 8,god1 be merciful to us1 and bless us1 and cause his face to shine upon us4 ,that thy way may be known upon earth1 thy saving health among all nations4 ,let the people praise thee1 ,o ,god2 yea1 let all the people praise thee40 7,ps4 lxvii47 ,no4 ,,viii4 ,,rabbinic ,,contempt ,,for ,,the ,,sons ,,of ,,noah4 ,the noblest inquiry1 to which the mental powers can be directed1 is1 ,which religion comes from ,god8 ,the most satisfactory mode of conducting such an inquiry1 independently of the external evidence1 is to compare the principles of one system with those of the other1 and both with an acknowledged standard1 if such there be1 and this is what we are endeavouring to do in these papers4 ,we by no means wish to make the modern ,jews responsible for the inventions of their forefathers1 but to show them that their traditional argument for rejecting ,christianity1 and that is the example of the high priest and the ,sanhedrin1 is of no force2 inasmuch as these same persons1 who originally rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth1 were in great and grievous error in the fundamental principles of religion1 whilst ,he who was rejected taught the truth4 ,to do this we must appeal to the oral law1 and discuss its merits4 ,we have shown already that those persons did not understand at least one half of the law2 that their doctrines were in the highest degree uncharitable4 ,it has1 however1 been replied1 that the ,talmud is more tolerant than the ,new ,testament1 for it allows 8that the pious of the nations of the world may be saved20 whereas the latter asserts that 8whosoever believeth not shall be damned40 ,we must1 therefore1 inquire into the extent of toleration and charity contained in that ,talmudic sentence4 ,the first step in this inquiry1 is to ascertain who are the persons intended in the expression 8,the pious of the nations of the world40 ,the oral law tells us1 as quoted in ,no4 #f1 that the ,israelites are commanded to compel all that come into the world to receive the seven commandments of the sons of ,noah1 and adds1 8,he that receives them is called universally a sojourning proselyte40 ,and a little lower down it says plainly 1 8,whosoever receives the seven commandments1 and is careful to observe them1 he is one of the pious of the nations of the world1 and has a share in the world to come40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 viii4 #aj47 ,from these two declarations1 then1 we learn that 8the pious of the nations of the world0 are the same1 as 8the sojourning proselytes10 who were allowed to reside in the land of ,israel1 and that their piety consisted in receiving and practising the seven commandments4 ,what these commandments were1 we are informed in the next chapter of the same treatise4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,the first ,adam was commanded concerning six things--idolatry1 blasphemy1 shedding of blood1 incest1 robbery1 and administration of justice4 ,although we have all these things as a tradition from ,moses1 our master1 and reason naturally inclines to them1 yet1 from the general tenour of the words of the law1 it appears that he was commanded concerning these things4 ,noah received an additional command concerning the limb of a living animal1 as it is said1 #8,but flesh in the life thereof1 which is the blood thereof1 ye shall not eat4' 7,gen4 ix4 #d47 ,here are the seven commandments1 and thus the matter was in all the world until ,abraham40 7,ibid4 ix4 #a47 ,now1 without stopping to dispute about the command given to ,noah1 we cannot help saying that the above tradition is very defective1 and certainly not derived from ,moses1 for it is opposed to the history which he himself has given us4 ,in the first place1 that command1 on which1 the oral law lays such stress1 8,be fruitful and multiply10 was originally given to ,adam 7,gen4 i4 #bh171 and was renewed to ,noah1 after the deluge4 ,if the ,rabbies reckon this as a separate command in the case of the ,jews1 as may be seen in the ,hilchoth ,priah ,ureviah1 it is only fair to reckon it as a separate command in the case of the ,gentiles1 and thus we get an eighth command4 ,in the second place1 ,god ordained marriage as a holy state4 8,the ,lord ,god said1 ,it is not good that man should be alone2 ,i will make him an help meet for him40 8,and the rib which the ,lord ,god had taken from man made he a woman1 and brought her unto the man40 ,here is ,god's holy institution1 and in the following verses we have the obligations of marriage distinctly acknowledged4 8,and ,adam said1 ,this is now bone of my bones1 and flesh of my flesh2 she shall be called ,woman1 because she was taken out of man4 ,therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother1 and shall cleave unto his wife1 and they shall be one flesh40 ,here1 then1 is a ninth commandment4 ,we know1 indeed1 that the oral law gives a different account1 but its doctrine is false and pernicious4 ,in the face of the above plain narrative1 it teaches as follows3-- 8,before the giving of the law1 a man might happen to meet a woman in the street2 if they both agreed on marriage1 he took her to his house1 and cohabited with her1 and she became his wife40 7,hilchoth ,ishuth1 c4 i4 #a47 ,now1 not to speak of profane history1 there is not in the law of ,moses a single passage to give colour to this statement1 unless it be the following3--8,and it came to pass1 when men began to multiply on the face of the earth1 and daughters were born unto them1 that the sons of ,god saw the daughters of men that they were fair2 and they took them wives of all which they chose40 ,but1 whatever is meant by 8,sons of ,god10 it is plain that this conduct is mentioned1 not as having the sanction or approval of ,god1 but as a proof of antediluvian wickedness1 for it is immediately added1 8,and the ,lord said1 ,my ,spirit shall not always strive with man1 for that he also is flesh40 ,but it is not simply an error of judgment1 it is most pernicious as it regards both ,gentiles and ,jews1 for it completely annuls the sanctity and obligation of the marriage tie4 ,it teaches that as the marriage of ,noahites is contracted without solemn espousals1 so it may be dissolved without the formality of a divorce4 8 1 1 1 1 8,when is his 7the ,noahite's7 neighbour's wife to be considered in the same light1 as a divorced woman with us8 ,from the time that he sends her forth from his house1 and leaves her to herself4 ,or from the time that she goes forth from under his power1 and goes her way2 for they have no divorces in writing1 neither does the matter depend upon that alone2#ae but whenever he or she please to separate one from the other1 they separate40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 ix4 #h47 ,we ,gentiles have great reason to be thankful that ,jesus of ,nazareth has taught us a different doctrine1 according with the original institution of marriage4 ,what would have been the state of the world1 if the oral law had attained supreme power1 and the ,gentiles had been instructed in the above law as ,divine8 ,what would result from the doctrine that every man may turn out his wife1 and every woman leave her husband1 whenever they like8 ,the peace and well-being of ,gentile society would be at an end4 ,the frightful state of disorder and misery that would ensue1 as well as the words of the original institution1 plainly show that this doctrine is not from ,god4 ,but the effect upon the believers in the oral law is still worse4 ,with reference to them1 the marriage of ,gentiles is no marriage at all4 ,the oral law says distinctly-- 4 8,there is no matrimony to the ,gentiles40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 viii4 #c47 ,and again1 8,there is no matrimony except to ,israel1 or to ,gentiles with respect to ,gentiles2 but not to slaves with respect to slaves1 nor to slaves with respect to ,israel40 7,hilchoth ,issure ,biah1 c4 xiv4 #ai47 ,here1 then1 the oral law directly makes void the law of ,god1 and pronounces that a command given to ,adam in ,paradise1 and therefore equally binding on all his descendants1 is in particular cases of no force at all4 ,the oral law1 therefore1 is certainly not from ,god4 ,we have already made out nine commandments2 in sacrifice we find a tenth4 ,cain and ,abel brought sacrifices1 and the only reason that can be assigned is1 that they had received a command to that effect4 ,sacrifice was either a ,divine command or the dictate of their own reason4 ,but it was not the dictate of reason1 for reason says1 that the ,creator of all things has no need of gifts1 and1 least of all1 such gifts as imply the slaughter of an innocent animal4 ,it must1 therefore1 have been of ,divine command4 ,the reason why the ,rabbies excluded this command is plain4 ,they did not choose that there should be acceptable sacrifices offered anywhere but amongst themselves4 ,but that this doctrine is altogether of a recent date is plain4 ,it was not known to ,job4 ,he says not a word about the seven commandments1 and he was in the habit of offering sacrifices4 8,and it was so when the day of their feasting was gone about1 that ,job sent and sanctified them1 and rose up early in the morning1 and offered burnt-offerings according to the number of them all40 7,job i4 #e47 ,and the ,lord himself expressly commanded ,job's friends to do so likewise4 8,and it was so1 that after the ,lord had spoken these words unto ,job1 the ,lord said to ,eliphaz the ,temanite1 ,my wrath is kindled against thee1 and against thy two friends4444 ,therefore1 take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams1 and go to my servant ,job1 and offer up for yourselves a burnt-offering1 and my servant ,job shall pray for you1 for him will ,i accept40 7,job xlii4 #g1 #h47 ,it was not known to ,elisha4 ,when ,naaman said1 8,shall there not then1 ,i pray thee1 be given to thy servant two mules' burden of earth8 ,for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt-offering nor sacrifice unto other gods1 but unto the ,lord40 7#b ,kings v4 #ag47 ,elisha made no objection4 ,he did not tell him that he had only seven commandments to attend to4 ,neither had ,isaiah any idea that1 when ,judaism triumphed1 the whole world was to be compelled to adhere to the seven commandments1 for he plainly predicts the contrary4 8,and the ,lord shall be known to ,egypt1 and the ,egyptians shall know the ,lord in that day1 and shall do sacrifice and oblation3 yea1 they shall vow a vow unto the ,lord and perform it40 7,isaiah xix4 #ba47 ,here again1 then1 the oral law contradicts the ,word of ,god4 ,but the law of ,god points out to us an eleventh commandment1 in the distinction between clean and unclean animals4 ,the ,lord commanded ,noah to take of the former by sevens and of the latter by pairs4 7,gen4 vii4 #b47 ,and when ,noah came forth from the ark 8he builded an altar unto the ,lord2 and took of every clean beast1 and of every clean fowl1 and offered burnt-offerings on the altar40 7,gen4 viii4 #b47 ,it is plain1 from the command1 that a greater number of clean than unclean animals was required4 ,noah's conduct shows that the rite of sacrifice was the cause of the requirement4 ,we have a twelfth commandment in the appointment of a priesthood4 8,melchizedek was the priest of the ,most ,high ,god10 7,gen4 xiv4 #aj17 which he most certainly could not have been1 if he had not been ,divinely appointed4 ,from the law itself1 then1 we have made out twelve distinct commandments4 ,eight would have been sufficient to overthrow the oral tradition4 ,but we appeal to the common sense of every ,talmudist4 ,we ask him to look over the meagre list of the seven commandments1 in which neither love to ,god nor man is included1 and to tell us whether it be at all probable that 8the ,god of the spirits of all flesh0 would leave all mankind1 excepting the small company of ,rabbinists1 without any better rule for time1 and any better guide to eternity8 ,is it possible that the ,god of love and mercy should leave the minority of his reasonable creatures in doubt as to his love1 and tell them that he requires no love from them8 ,yet this is what the oral law says4 ,the ,gentiles are1 according to it1 left without any direction as to the worship of ,god1 and are pronounced guilty of death if they study the law4 ,nay1 they are expressly told that ,god does not require them to glorify him by their obedience4 1 1 1 8,a ,noahite who is forced to transgress one of his commandments1 it is lawful for him to do so4 ,even if he be compelled to commit idolatry he may commit it1 for they are not commanded to sanctify ,god40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 x4 #b47 ,so that1 according to the ,rabbies1 the ,noahite who is compelled to commit murder1 adultery1 or even to deny his ,god1 may do it with impunity2 he still belongs 8to the pious of the nations of the world10 and may have a share in the world to come4 ,we confess that we cannot see in this doctrine either charity or toleration4 ,we can discover only that narrowness of heart which characterizes the oral law4 ,in order to magnify themselves1 and depreciate the other nations1 the ,rabbies first swell out their own commandments to #fac1 and reduce the commandments of the nations to seven4 ,but not content with that1 they also strive to confine the glories of martyrdom to themselves1 and tell the ,gentiles that ,god does not require them to sanctify ,his name4 ,can such doctrine come from ,god8 ,is ,god the ,god of the ,rabbinists only8 ,we grant that the ,jews are his 8peculiar people40 ,we acknowledge that 8they have much advantage every way0--that 8they are beloved for the fathers' sakes0--that the time is coming when 8all that see them shall acknowledge them that they are the seed whom the ,lord has blessed40 ,but we still think that ,god's heart is large enough to comprehend us ,gentiles too in his love4 ,we know that we are the work of ,his hand1 and we trust that1 as ,he is our ,father1 he requires1 and is pleased to see even in ,gentiles1 the feelings of children1 love and filial fear4 ,and we found this our faith on your ,scriptures as well as ours4 ,the ,word of ,god tells us that1 long before there were any ,rabbies in the world1 ,he had a gracious and tender care for all mankind4 ,he promised to our first parents a ,saviour who should 8bruise the serpent's head40 ,he saved ,noah and his family1 not one of whom was a ,rabbi1 from the deluge2 and when they came forth from the ark1 ,he made a gracious covenant not with one nation only1 but 8with all flesh10 and hung up on high a lovely and glittering arch1 from one end of the heavens to the other1 that all the habitants of earth might have a token of their ,father's love and learn to look up to ,him with humble confidence4 ,when he chose ,abraham and his seed1 it was not an act of partiality1 but that in his seed all the families of the earth might be blessed4 ,he did not leave himself without witness to the nations4 ,he manifested himself to ,job1 and taught him 8that his ,redeemer liveth10 and moved even the prophets of ,israel to predict again and again the happy times when1 8from the rising of the sun to the going down of the same1 ,his name should be great among the ,gentiles1 and in every place incense should be offered to his name1 and a pure offering2 for my name shall be great among the heathen1 saith the ,lord of hosts40 7,mal4 i4 #aa47 ,having this word1 we reject the oral law which contradicts it1 and would make ,god the ,god of the ,rabbinists only3 and we believe in the ,new ,testament1 which exactly agrees with your written law1 and asks1 8,is he the ,god of the ,jews only8 ,is he not also of the ,gentiles80--and answers1 8,yes1 of the ,gentiles also0 7,rom4 iii4 #bi7--;and which also declares that1 in the sight of ,god1 8,there is no difference between the ,jew and the ,greek2 for the same ,lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him1 for whosoever shall call upon the name of the ,lord shall be saved40 7,rom4 x4 #ab1 #ac47 ,in the fixing of the commandments1 then1 for the sons of ,noah1 we have detected an intolerant and uncharitable spirit very different from that of the ,old and ,new ,testament4 ,but we have further to inquire1 what was the extent of toleration conceded to them8 ,we do not stop to prove that they were not allowed to possess land1 nor to be judges1 nor members of the ,sanhedrin1 nor to hold any office1 nor to intermarry with the ,jews4 ,from all that1 they were excluded by the law of ,god himself4 ,they were allowed to sojourn in the land1 and hence their name 8sojourning proselytes40 ,further1 8,they were to be treated with the same courtesy and benevolence as the ,israelites40 7,see ,no4 #d1 p4 #bf47 ,but further than this the toleration did not extend4 ,the oral law1 though it commands 8courtesy and benevolence10 does not administer even-handed justice to the 8pious of the nations of the world10 as may be seen from the following specimens3-- 4 4 4 8,an ,israelite who unintentionally kills a slave1 or a sojourning proselyte1 is imprisoned 7in one of the cities of refuge740 8,and so a sojourning proselyte who unintentionally kills a sojourning proselyte1 or a slave1 is imprisoned40 8,a sojourning proselyte who unintentionally kills an ,israelite1 although he did it unintentionally1 is to be put to death40 7,hilchoth ,rotzeach1 c4 v4 #c47 ,the written law1 on the contrary1 says1 8,these six cities shall be a refuge1 both for the children of ,israel and for the stranger1 and for the sojourner among them3 that any one that killeth any person unawares may flee thither40 7,numbers xxxv4 #ae47 ,again1 the oral law says-- 1 8,an ,israelite who kills a sojourning proselyte1 is not put to death on his account by the tribunal1 for it is said1 #8,but if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour4' 7,exodus xxi4 #ad470 ,the law of ,god says1 8,whoso sheddeth man's blood1 by man shall his blood be shed3 for in the image of ,god made he man40 7,gen4 ix4 #f47 ,and to this law the ,new ,testament commands us ,christians to adhere1 rejecting the oral traditions2 and in consequence the laws of ,christian countries make no difference between the murderer of a ,jew1 a ,christian1 ,turk1 ,infidel1 or ,heretic4 ,short as all ,christian nations confessedly come of the pure morality of the ,new ,testament1 their laws direct the administration of impartial justice1 and are a terror to all evil doers of every creed and sect4 ,the liberality of the ,talmud then1 in allowing a share of salvation to the pious of the world is not so very great1 nor its toleration of a very comprehensive character4 ,it not only withholds justice from the pious of the world1 but gives as the reason1 because they are not considered as neighbours4 ,want of room prevents us from pursuing this subject further at present4 ,we therefore ask1 ,is this law from ,god8 ,can ,god1 in an oral law1 directly contradict his written law8 ,can you point out anything similar in the ,new ,testament8 ,is this law just or unjust8 ,you will grant that it is unjust and erroneous4 ,then your fathers have been mistaken about one of the first principles of the administration of justice1 for many centuries4 ,and your brethren who adhere to this system as ,divine1 as on the ,barbary coast1 for instance1 are still mistaken4 ,why do you not protest aloud against such error8 ,why not endeavour to convince your brethren that they are wrong8 ,in ,england there is nothing to prevent you4 ,there is full liberty1 free toleration4 ,you may lift up your voice like a trumpet against the errors of the ,talmud4 ,you may expunge all acknowledgment of its authority from your prayers--you may return to ,moses and the prophets1 and no man will say nay4 ,footnote #ae3 ,instead of alone1 there is another reading1 1 the tribunal4 ,no4 ,,ix4 ,,christians ,,cannot ,,be ,,reckoned ,,amongst ,,the 8,,pious ,,of ,,the ,,nations ,,of ,,the ,,world40 ,we said1 in our last number1 that 8the pious of the nations of the world0 are1 according to the oral law1 those who have received the seven commandments of the sons of ,noah4 ,we said that of the laws laid down for their own conduct1 some1 as for instance that respecting divorces1 are such as would introduce confusion and misery into ,gentile society--and that others1 referring to the administration of justice by ,rabbinical tribunals1 are extremely unjust4 ,but the advocates of the oral law think1 nevertheless1 that it is very tolerant1 more tolerant than the ,new ,testament1 because it says that 8the pious of the nations of the world have a share in the world to come40 ,now we cannot help feeling a curiosity to know how great or how small that share will be4 ,and this our curiosity is excited by the following information1 which the oral law commands to be communicated to a ,gentile who wishes to turn ,jew3-- 1 1 1 1 8,as they are to make known to him the punishments attached to the commandments1 so they are also to inform him of the rewards for keeping them4 ,they should inform him1 that1 by the doing of these commandments1 he will be worthy of everlasting life2 and that there is no perfectly righteous man1 except that possessor of wisdom who does and knows them4 ,and they are to say to him1 ,be assured that the world to come is laid up for none but the righteous1 and they are ,israel2 and as to this that thou seest ,israel in trouble in this world1 their good things are laid up for them1 for they cannot receive an abundance of good things in this world1 like the nations4 ,their heart might1 perchance1 be lifted up1 and they might go astray1 and lose the reward of the world to come1 as it is said1 #8,jeshurun waxed fat and kicked4' ,the ,holy ,one1 blessed be he1 brings upon them the abundance of afflictions for no other reason than this1 that they may not be lost4 ,all the nations shall be utterly destroyed1 but they shall abide40 7,hilchoth ,issure ,biah41 c4 xiv4 #c-e47 ,to us this sounds very much like a flat contradiction to the above declaration1 that 8the pious of the nations of the world have a share in the world to come40 ,here1 on the contrary1 it is stated that the blessings of that state are reserved 8for none but the righteous1 and they are ,israel20 and again1 8,all the nations snail be utterly destroyed40 ,and it is even implied that the nations get their good things in this world1 and do not suffer affliction1 as they are not to have that blessedness1 which is reserved for the righteous4 ,how1 then1 are we to reconcile these two sayings8 ,there are only two ways which occur to us1 either by saying that this is not strictly true1 but only a fair speech in order to catch proselytes2 or1 if it be strictly true1 that then 8the pious of the world0 are to have a much smaller share in the blessedness to come4 ,in any case the spirit is far from charitable or tolerant4 ,it represents ,god as an accepter of persons1 saving ,israelites simply because they are ,israelites1 and destroying the other nations because they are not ,israelites4 ,the ,new ,testament representation is very different1 and far more worthy of 8the ,judge of all the earth40 ,it does indeed say1 8,he that believeth shall be saved1 and he that believeth not shall be damned40 ,but in this very declaration1 we have an impartial rule applied to all mankind4 8,he that believeth10 of whatsoever nation1 kindred1 or tongue--,jew or ,gentile1 white or black--8shall be saved40 8,he that believeth not10 whether he be called a ,jew or a ,christian1 whether he be a son of ,japhet1 of ,shem1 or of ,ham1 8shall be damned40 ,the ,new ,testament asserts no monopoly of salvation for one favoured family4 ,it excludes none because he had not the happiness to be descended from a privileged stock4 ,it lays down a general and impartial rule to be applied to all the children of men4 ,the oral law says1 8,all ,israel has a share in the world to come40 ,the ,new ,testament says1 8,not every one that saith unto me1 ,lord1 ,lord1 shall enter the kingdom of heaven1 but he that doeth the will of my ,father which is in heaven40 7,matt4 vii4 #ba47 ,the oral law says1 8,the world to come is laid up for none but the righteous1 and they are ,israel40 ,the ,new ,testament says1 8,god is no respecter of persons2 but in every nation he that feareth him1 and worketh righteousness1 is accepted with him40 7,acts x4 #cd1 #ce47 ,now then we appeal to the good sense of every ,jew1 even of the ,talmudists to tell us which of these two statements is most just1 impartial1 and worthy of the ,just ,judge8 ,but the reasoning employed in the above extract from the oral law1 is as false as the principles which it is intended to support1 when it says1 8,as to this that thou seest ,israel in trouble in this world1 their good things are laid up for them1 for they cannot receive an abundance of good things in this world like the nations10 it directly contradicts the law of ,moses1 which everywhere promises an abundance of temporal blessings to ,israel1 if obedient4 8,it shall come to pass1 if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the ,lord thy ,god1 to observe and to do all the commandments which ,i command thee this day1 that the ,lord thy ,god will set thee on high above all nations of the earth1 and all these blessings shall come upon thee1 and overtake thee1 if thou shalt hearken unto the voice of the ,lord thy ,god4 ,blessed shalt thou be in the city1 and blessed shalt thou be in the field4 ,blessed shall be the fruit of thy body1 and the fruit of thy ground1 and the fruit of thy cattle1 the increase of thy kine1 and the flocks of thy sheep4444 ,the ,lord shall cause thine enemies that rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face2 they shall come out against thee one way1 and flee before thee seven ways4 ,the ,lord shall command the blessing upon thee in thy store-houses1 and in all that thou settest thine hand unto2 and he shall bless thee in the land which the ,lord thy ,god giveth thee40 7,deut4 xxviii4 #a-h1 c47 ,here1 then1 is temporal blessing in abundance1 promised to obedience2 and the afflictions which have come upon ,israel are not because of their piety1 but because of their disobedience4 ,in this case1 then1 the oral law speaks utter falsehood4 ,god has not two ways of dealing with nations1 but one way4 ,he gives every nation a fair trial1 and if they refuse to hearken to his voice1 he pours out upon them his wrath4 ,the rise1 and growth1 and trial1 of a nation is slower1 and requires more time than the growth and trial of individual men4 ,the life of a nation is1 so to speak1 longer than the life of a man4 ,centuries are required as the time of a nation's trial1 but all history1 sacred and profane1 testifies the truth of the general rule given in the ,old ,testament1 8,righteousness exalteth a nation1 but sin is a reproach to any people40 ,the only difference which ,god makes between ,israel and the other nations1 is with regard to their national existence in this world4 ,he has crumbled the mighty empires of ,assyria1 ,babylon1 ,greece1 and ,rome into dust1 but he still preserves the independent existence of the family of ,abraham1 according to his covenant2 and when1 as a nation1 they repent and return to him1 ,he will remove the rod of his anger1 and give them the temporal prosperity which ,he has promised by the mouth of ,moses his servant4 ,but this promise of temporal blessing will not justify any impenitent ,jew at the tribunal of ,god's judgment4 ,the hopes held out by the oral law are utterly fallacious1 and dishonouring to ,god1 inasmuch as he is represented as unduly favouring one nation1 and unjustly condemning all others4 ,an advocate of the oral law may1 however1 find out some other way of evading the evident intolerance of the above statement1 and still insist upon it1 that as the ,talmud says1 8,the pious of the nations of the world have a share in the world to come10 it is a very tolerant book4 ,we therefore proceed to inquire what pains the ,rabbies have taken to add to the number of those who are to be saved4 ,they believe1 as we are told1 that every one1 who receives and observes the seven commandments of the sons of ,noah1 will be saved2 they believe that all others must be lost2 have they then taken any pains to make known this important information to the world8 ,or1 if that was not to be expected during the captivity1 did they during the days of their power and dominion8 ,or1 at least1 did they offer every facility to those ,gentiles who might come to renounce idolatry1 to receive the necessary instruction8 ,did they command all their disciples to be ready day and night to open their doors at the knock of the penitent idolater1 and by receiving rescue him from everlasting destruction8 ,not one of all these things4 ,they commanded that1 when there was no jubilee1 such converts should be refused1 and that if they did not choose to be circumcised and observe the whole ,mosaic law1 they should be left to perish4 1 1 8,what is meant by a sojourning proselyte8 ,such an one is a ,gentile1 who has taken upon himself not to commit idolatry1 together with the remaining commandments given to the sons of ,noah1 but is not circumcised nor baptized4 ,such an one is received1 and is of the pious of the nations of the world4 ,and why is he called a sojourner8 ,because it is lawful for us to let him dwell amongst us in the land of ,israel1 as we have explained in the laws concerning idolatry4 ,but a sojourning ,proselyte is not received ,,when ,,the ,,jubilee ,,cannot ,,be ,,observed40 7,hilchoth ,issure ,biah41 c4 xiv4 #g1 #h47 ,at all other times the unfortunate heathen might perish1 if they did not choose to become ,jews altogether4 ,now what will be thought of the charity of this law if we add1 that there has been no jubilee1 and consequently no pious amongst the nations for two thousand seven hundred years and more8 ,yet this is what the oral law tells us4 1 1 8,since the time that the tribe of ,reuben1 and the tribe of ,gad and the half-tribe of ,manasseh were led away captive1 the jubilees have ceased1 for it is said1 #8,and ye shall proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof' 7,lev4 xxv4 #aj72 that means1 when all its inhabitants are upon it1 and1 moreover1 when the tribes are not mixed one with another1 but all dwelling according as they were appointed40 7,hilchoth ,shemitah1 c4 x4 #h47 ,we have the account of this captivity in the following words1 8,in those days the ,lord began to cut ,israel short3 and ,hazael smote them in all the coasts of ,israel3 from ,jordan eastward1 all the land of ,gilead1 the ,gadites1 and the ,reubenites1 and the ,manassites40 7#b ,kings x4 #cb1 #cc47 ,that was1 according to the common chronology about #hhd years before the ,christian era4 ,if to this we add #ahcf1 we have #bgbj years since the time that there could be a jubilee1 and consequently #bgbj years since any ,gentiles were converted from the errors of idolatry to the religion of the sons of ,noah4 ,what is it then but solemn mockery1 in any one acquainted with the oral law1 to tell us that the ,talmud is tolerant1 and admits 8that the pious of the nations of the world may be saved20 when according to that same book seven-and-twenty centuries have elapsed1 since any such converts were received8 ,we believe that those who make this defence are unacquainted with the principles of the system which they undertake to defend4 ,the truth is1 that the authors of the oral law1 finding that they could not altogether deny salvation to the pious of other nations1 were determined not to add to their number1 and therefore limited the possibility of this mode of conversion to times that had elapsed long before they were born4 ,but in their own times they would not receive any one who was not willing to be circumcised and to receive the whole law4 ,and hence we see how exactly the ,new ,testament represents the state of the case1 when ,christianity was first propagated amongst the ,gentiles1 and free salvation was proclaimed to all who believed1 without becoming ,jewish proselytes4 ,the ,rabbinists opposed with all their might4 8,and certain men which came down from ,judea taught the brethren and said1 ,except ye be circumcised after the manner of ,moses1 ye cannot be saved40 ,and again1 8,there rose up certain of the sect of the ,pharisees which believed1 saying that it was needful to circumcise them1 and to command them to keep the law of ,moses40 7,acts xv4 #a-e47 ,there was no year of jubilee1 and therefore renunciation of idolatry was not sufficient in the eyes of these traditionists1 who believed that at such a time there was no salvation except for those who observed the whole law4 ,but how is it now8 ,if a ,gentile should desire now to become one of the pious of the nations1 could the ,jews receive him8 ,according to the above general principles1 certainly not4 ,the tribes are still scattered and mixed up together4 ,the land has not got 8all its inhabitants40 ,there can be no jubilee1 and therefore those that wish to be saved1 must1 according to the oral law1 turn ,jews1 or take their chance of living to a year of jubilee4 ,but we are not necessitated to argue from the principles4 ,the thing is expressly laid down in the oral law4 ,after explaining1 as we have quoted above1 who are the pious of the world1 and that when the jubilee is possible1 is the only time for receiving them1 it adds-- 8,but in the present time1 though a man should be willing to take upon him the whole law1 with the exception of only one of its least requirements1 he is not to be received40 ,now then what becomes of the boasted toleration of the ,talmud8 ,it says1 that 8the pious of the nations of the world may be saved40 ,but it says1 first1 that such converts can only be received when the jubilee can be celebrated4 ,it says1 secondly1 that this only opportunity has not occurred for the last #b1gjj years2 and1 lastly1 it positively forbids the ,jews in the present time to give the ,gentiles a chance of salvation1 unless they are willing to receive the whole law4 ,what use is it then to talk of the pious of the world1 or to say that people of other religions may be saved8 ,according to the ,talmud1 there are no pious of the nations1 unless perchance there may be some descendants of those who were received #b1gjj years ago4 ,but all history that we have ever seen is silent on the subject4 ,we do not know of a single congregation of ,noahites in the whole world4 ,the forefathers of the ,christians were not received during the usage of jubilee4 ,they were idolaters received against the wishes of the ,rabbinists4 ,the ,britons and the ,saxons were converted to ,christianity long after the final dispersion of the ,jews1 that is1 at a time when1 according to the ,talmud1 it was unlawful to add to the pious amongst the nations4 ,neither were they received according to the ,talmudic condition1 in the presence of three learned ,jews4 8,and it is necessary for such an one to take the seven commandments on him in the presence of three learned men1 who are qualified to be ,rabbies40 7,hilchoth ,melachim1 c4 viii4 #aj47 ,according to the oral law1 then1 there are no such persons now existing as 8the pious of the nations of the world40 ,it is1 therefore1 idle to talk of the liberality with which they would be treated1 were they forthcoming4 ,thus the only appearance of an argument in favour of the ,talmud vanishes into thin air1 and mocks our grasp1 as soon as we endeavour to lay hold of it4 ,those who caught at this phantom of charity1 no doubt meant it sincerely4 ,they thought that the oral law was misrepresented4 ,they were told that it was charitable1 and they therefore nobly came forward in its defence4 ,if they had known its true principles1 they would have renounced them4 ,their advocacy went on a false supposition4 ,but now that we have set forth the true bearings of the case1 and given them chapter and verse to which they may refer1 and convince themselves1 we call upon them to do so3 and then1 as they hate intolerance1 to join with us in protesting against it1 even though it should be found in that system1 which hitherto they have believed1 on the testimony of others1 to be ,divine4 ,at the same time we would seriously ask of them to compare this system1 which has been for more than #a1gjj years the religion of the majority of the ,jewish nation1 with the system laid down in the ,new ,testament1 and to decide which is most agreeable to the character of ,god1 as revealed in the law and the prophets1 and most beneficial to the world4 ,the oral law says1 that ,god has commanded the heathen to be left for #b1gjj years without the means of instruction1 and that when the days of ,israel's prosperity come1 the nations are to be converted by force2 but that even then1 they will not be raised to the rank of brethren1 but only be sojourning proselytes4 ,the oral law looks forward to no reunion of all the sons of ,adam into one happy family4 ,the ,new ,testament has1 on the contrary1 commanded its disciples to afford the means of instruction 8to every creature40 ,it speaks to us ,gentiles1 who were once regarded as poor outcasts1 in the language of love1 and says1 8,now1 therefore1 ye are no more strangers and foreigners1 but fellow-citizens with the saints1 and of the household of ,god40 7,ephes4 ii4 #ai47 ,it takes nothing from you4 ,it asserts your privileges as the peculiar people of ,god2 but it reveals that great1 and to us1 most comfortable truth1 8,that the ,gentiles should be follow-heirs1 and of the same body20 and it promises a happy time1 when there shall be one fold and one ,shepherd4 ,it does1 indeed1 tell us not to forget what we once were1 8aliens from the commonwealth of ,israel1 and strangers from the covenant of promise1 having no hope1 and without ,god in the world40 7,eph4 ii4 #ab47 ,it reminds us that the olive-tree is ,jewish1 and that you are the natural branches1 and warns us against all boasting4 7,rom4 xi4 #af-bd47 ,and we desire to remember these admonitions1 and to acknowledge with thankfulness1 that all that we have received1 is derived from the ,jewish nation4 ,we ask you not to compare the oral law with any ,gentile speculations1 or systems1 or inventions1 but with doctrines essentially and entirely ,jewish4 ,christianity has effected great and glorious changes in the world1 but we take not the glory to ourselves4 ,we give it to ,god1 who is the author of all good1 and under ,him1 to the people of ,israel4 ,we ask you1 then1 to compare these two ,jewish systems1 ,rabbinism1 which has done no good to the ,gentiles1 and perpetuated much error amongst the ,jews2 and ,christianity1 which has diffused over the world the knowledge of the one true ,god--disseminated the writings of ,moses and the prophets1 and increased the happiness of a large portion of mankind4 ,the comparison may require time1 and ought to be conducted with calmness and seriousness4 ,but we think that1 even without instituting that comparison1 you must acknowledge that the principles of the oral law1 discussed in this paper1 are contrary to the law of ,moses2 and that1 therefore1 a decided and solemn protest against these ,rabbinical additions1 is an immediate and imperative duty4 ,no4 ,x4 ,,rabbinic ,,washing ,,of ,,hands4 ,there are various marks by which a religion of man's making may be detected4 ,it is usually intolerant1 superstitious1 and voluminous4 ,it limits the love of ,god to a particular class4 ,it exalts ceremonial observances above the worship of the heart2 and so multiplies its laws and definitions1 as to put the knowledge of it beyond the reach of any but the learned4 ,any one of these marks would go far towards shaking the claims of a religious system4 ,far instance1 if it lay down as religious duties so many and such subtle laws1 as it is impossible for the unlearned to attain a knowledge of1 it is plainly the invention of the learned1 who have thought only of themselves1 and have not that tender regard and consideration for the ignorant1 which the ,creator has4 ,his religion must be for all1 the poor as well as the rich1 and the ignorant as well as the wise of this world4 ,we fear that the oral law of the ,rabbies will not stand any one of these tests3 it is1 at all events1 a religion for the learned1 and the learned only4 ,there is scarcely one of its commandments that is not so encumbered with distinctions and definitions1 as to make the right interpretation of it the sole property of the educated4 ,take1 for example1 one of the first and most frequent of the commandments1 in the ,rabbinist's daily practice1 7the washing of hands47 ,the command appears very simple4 ,it says-- 8,let him wash his hands1 and pronounce the benediction for the washing of hands40 7,orach ,chaiim41 #d47 ,but out of this short command arise endless distinctions1 according to which the act performed is regarded as a valid or invalid fulfilment of the command4 1 1 1 8,every one who washes his hands must attend to four things4 #ast1 ,to the water1 that it be not unlawful for the washing of hands4 #b;d1 ,to the measure1 that there be a quartern for the two hands4 #c;d1 ,to the vessel1 that the water1 wherewith the washing is performed1 be in a vessel4 #dth1 ,to the washer1 that the water come with force from him that pours40 7,hilchoth ,berachoth1 vi4 #f47 ,each of these four limitations requires new explanations and definitions of its own1 as for example1 there are four things that make water unlawful for the washing of hands2 one of these is1 if any work be done with it4 ,this necessarily requires fresh definitions of what is and is not work4 ,then come the directions as to how for the washing is to reach1 the position of the hands1 whether they are to be held up or down1 the drying of the hands4 ,a perfect and accurate knowledge of all these conditions can be attained only by the learned4 ,and after all the care which these things require1 the ,israelite may after all fall short of ,talmudic requirement1 for there is still another condition1 that involves another host of ,rabbinic definitions1 the non-observance of which will invalidate the merit of his washing4 8,every thing that is an impediment in baptism is an impediment in washing of hands40 7,hilchoth ,mikvaoth1 xi4 #b47 ,this1 of course1 leads to a new inquiry1 what constitutes an impediment4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,these are the impediments in human beings4 ,the film that is outside the eye4 ,the incrustation outside a wound4 ,dry blood that is on a wound4 ,the plaster that is on it4 ,filth upon the flesh4 ,the impurity or dirt under the nails4 ,dirt upon the body1 mud1 potter's clay1 c40 7,ibid41 c4 ii4 #a47 ,every one of these can give rise to endless questions in casuistry1 which are evidently beyond the powers of the unlearned1 and must draw him1 if he be a conscientious man1 to the ,rabbi to solicit his advice4 ,thus1 one of the very first commandments with which the ,jew begins the day1 requires for its accurate fulfilment a degree of knowledge which is far beyond the attainment of the multitude4 ,this one commandment involves scores of others4 ,nay1 we doubt not that an accurate ,talmudist might make #fac constitutions out of this one alone2 and we appeal to the conscience of the great majority of ,jews in ,london to decide whether they possess the knowledge here required1 and consequently whether it is possible for them to keep this one commandment4 ,if they transgress any one of these ,rabbinic distinctions1 their hands are not washed1 and consequently they are unfit for prayer4 ,but this is not a command for the morning only4 ,it must be repeated through the day4 1 1 8,every one who eats that sort of bread1 for which the benediction is1 #8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord our ,god1 ,king of the universe6 who bringeth forth bread from the earth1'#af is bound to wash his hands at the beginning and end4 ,and although the bread be common1 and although his hands have not been defiled1 and he is not aware of any uncleanness upon them1 he is not to eat until he wash both his hands4 ,and thus1 also1 with regard to anything that is dipped in fluid1 the washing of hands is necessary at the beginning40 7,hilchoth ,berachoth1 vi4 #a47 ,here1 again1 it is necessary to know the different sorts of bread1 and the compounds that may be made with the different sorts of flour1 and the various forms of benediction1 and out of these again may arise as many doubts and questions as out of the former1 for the solution of which learning1 acuteness1 and practice are required2 and the want of these may lead to transgression1 and1 according to the ,rabbies1 to most fatal consequences4 ,for instance1 neglect of this command after the meal may cause blindness4 4 4 4 8,all bread that has salt in it requires washing of hands after it2 lest perhaps it might be the salt of ,sodom1 or salt of the same nature1 and a man might pass his hand over his eyes and become blind4 ,on this account all are bound to wash their hands at the end of every meal1 because of the salt4 ,but in a camp they are exempt from washing at the beginning1 because they are oppressed with the fatigues of war1 and are bound to wash after meal on account of the danger40 7,ibid41 #c47 ,suppose1 then1 that a poor ignorant man1 with the best intention in the world1 set about this washing1 and made a mistake with regard to the water1 or the vessel1 or the pouring1 or the position of his hands2 or suppose that a soldier1 in the hurry of a camp1 were to make this mistake1 or omit the washing altogether1 and then have the ill luck to put his hands to his eyes1 according to the oral law1 blindness would be the consequence4 ,any neglect or defect in the morning ablution would be more fatal still4 4 1 1 1 4 8,a man must be very careful in pouring water on his hands three times for an evil spirit rests upon the hands before washing1 and does not depart until water be poured on them three times4 ,therefore it is necessary1 before washing1 to abstain from touching the hand to the mouth1 and the nose1 and the ears1 and the eyes1 because an evil spirit rests upon them40 7,orach ,chaiim41 #d47 ,now1 is this the religion of the ,god of love1 and mercy1 and justice8 ,is it at all like ,him to give laws so subtle and multifarious in their distinctions1 that it is next to impossible for the unlearned man to obey them aright1 and then to attach to this non-observance such calamitous consequences8 ,if it be replied that the punishment is visited only on those who transgress wilfully1 then there are thousands of ,jews1 perhaps in this very city1 who live in the habitual and wilful omission of this precept1 and who have the use of their eyes1 just as well as the strictest ,rabbinist4 ,this fact1 which no one will dispute1 proves beyond doubt1 that the oral law has spoken falsehood1 and therefore throws utter discredit upon its testimony respecting the tradition of the commandment itself4 ,it is confessedly not a commandment from ,god1 but from the scribes4 8,we have explained long ago1 that the washing and bathing of the hands are derived from the words of the scribes40 7,hilchoth ,mikvaoth1 xi4 #a47 ,that they had no ,divine authority for the command is evident from the subtilty and superstition of its ordinances2 for we presume that few will question the superstition of the threat of blindness to the disobedient1 or of the fable of the evil spirit resting upon the hands4 ,one such command1 then1 will go far to discredit the whole story of an oral law1 and to invalidate the character of its witnesses4 ,they were evidently superstitious men1 no way elevated above the vulgar prejudices or the times1 not at all scrupulous in adding to the law of ,god1 and evidently aiming at a complete domination over the consciences of their followers4 ,it is hardly possible to believe that they were not aware of the necessary result of the system1 the complete subjugation of the consciences of the multitude4 ,the mass of mankind has no leisure for the study of juristic distinctions1 they must1 therefore1 if they believe such to be ,divine1 cast themselves upon the mercy of the learned1 and there can be no doubt that those who have the keys of salvation1 will also possess no small degree of influence and power in this world4 ,but1 whatever was the motive1 there can be no doubt about the severity with which the ,rabbies enforced this command4 ,they exacted even from the poor unfortunate1 whom circumstances left only enough water to slake his thirst1 that he should sacrifice a port of it to this ,rabbinical purification4 8,though he should only have enough water to drink1 he is to wash his hands with a part of it1 and then to eat1 and to drink the remainder40 7,hilchoth ,berachoth1 vi4 #ai47 ,and not content with this harsh requirement1 they sentence the despiser of their commands to excommunication4 8,it is necessary to be very careful in washing of hands1 for every one who despises the washing of hands is guilty of excommunication40 7,orach ,chaiim41 #aeh47 ,and this same book confirms this decision by a case which actually occurred of a man thus excommunicated1 and who dying in his excommunication had the usual indignities offered to his corpse4 8,whom did they excommunicate8 ,eleazar ben ,chatzar1 who despised the washing of hands2 and when he was dead1 the tribunal sent1 and had a great stone laid on his coffin1 to teach thee that of every one who is excommunicated and dies in his excommunication1 the coffin is stoned by the tribunal40 7,talmud1 ,berachoth1 fol4 #ai1 col4 #a47 ,when they had the power they employed it to the full1 and now that they have it not1 the oral law still threatens poverty and extirpation to every transgressor4 8,every one who despises washing of hands sinks into poverty4 ,r4 ,zerika says1 in the name of ,r4 ,eliezer1 ,every one that despises the washing of hands is rooted out of the world40 7,orach ,chaiim41 ibid47 ,such is the toleration of the oral law towards ,jews1 accused of no breach of ,god's commandment1 convicted of no denial of ,god's ,word1 guilty of no crime4 ,and yet these same men1 who are strict even to persecution about one of their own institutions1 allow that which they consider the ,word of ,god to be transgressed with impunity1 if it be expedient4 ,they assert their belief1 that the law of ,moses forbids the ,jews to have clothing1 like that of the ,gentiles1 to shave or to wear their hair like the other nations1 and yet they say the transgression of this ,divine command is lawful under the following circumstances3-- 8,an ,israelite who is near to ,royalty1 and is obliged to sit before ,gentile kings1 and for whom it would be disgraceful not to be like them1 is allowed to dress and to shave as they do40 7,hilchoth ,accum41 xi4 #c47 ,but it is not to be wondered at1 that those should lightly esteem the ,word of ,god1 who are capable of confounding the guilt of transgressing a mere human ceremony with the guilt of transgressing a ,divine command4 ,the ,talmud makes the sin of neglecting this command as great as that of gross immorality4 8,every one who eats bread without washing of hands1 is as guilty as if he had committed fornication40 7,sotah1 fol4 iv41 col4 #b47 ,the sum of all that has been said is1 that the scribes and ,pharisees added a commandment not given by ,moses1 that they so refined upon the conditions of its fulfilment as to make it almost impossible for the unlearned not to transgress it1 and yet denounced such heavy penalties upon the transgressor as to make it an intolerable burden to the conscientious2 that when they had the power1 they persecuted all that refused obedience1 and did not scruple to pronounce the guilt of transgression as great as that of breaking one of the moral commandments4 ,they have presented as the religion of ,moses a system which is voluminous1 superstitious1 and intolerant2 difficult to the comprehension of the unlearned1 terrific to their consciences1 and cruel to their persons4 ,but when the poor were ground down and oppressed under this weight of superstition and tyranny1 ,god sent them a deliverer in ,jesus of ,nazareth1 who asserted the revealed truth of ,god1 and protested against this mental bondage4 8,then come together unto him the ,pharisees1 and certain of the scribes which came from ,jerusalem4 ,and when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled 7that is to say1 with unwashen7 hands they found fault4444 ,he answered and said unto them1 ,well hath ,esaias prophesied of you hypocrites1 as it is written1 ,this people honoureth me with their lips1 but their heart is far from me4 ,howbeit in vain do they worship me1 teaching for doctrines the commandments of men4444 ,and when he had called all the people unto him1 he said unto them1 ,hearken unto me every one of you and understand3 there is nothing from without a man that1 entering into him1 can defile him3 but the things which come out of him1 those are they that defile him4444 ,for from within1 out of the heart of men1 proceed evil thoughts1 adulteries1 fornications1 murders1 thefts1 covetousness1 wickedness1 deceit1 lasciviousness1 an evil eye1 blasphemy1 pride1 foolishness3 all these things come from within1 and defile the man40 7,mark vii4 #a-bc47 ,here the ,lord ,jesus asserts what is alike the truth of ,god1 and agreeable to the dictates of sound sense4 ,so ,samuel said in the ,old ,testament4 8,man looketh on the outward appearance1 but ,god looketh on the heart40 7#a ,sam4 xvi4 #g47 ,but the scribes and ,pharisees treated the ,lord ,jesus in the spirit of the laws which we have adduced above4 ,they persecuted him unto death1 and to the death ,he willingly went a martyr for the truth1 and a sacrifice for the sin of the world4 ,the authors of the oral law had but a short triumph4 ,he rose from the dead1 and his doctrine spread through the world1 and everywhere announced freedom from the bondage of superstition as well as a hope of everlasting life4 ,and the ,jewish nation is at this hour enjoying the fruits of ,his death and doctrine in their liberty from ,rabbinic domination4 ,many of you now hold some of those principles1 the assertion of which was the cause of ,his death4 ,you believe that moral duties are far beyond ceremonial observances4 ,you believe1 many of you1 that to eat with unwashen hands is no sin1 and have given up the practice4 ,you transgress this commandment of the scribes1 and yet you are not excommunicated nor persecuted4 ,for all this you are indebted to ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,if the oral law had triumphed1 and the doctrine of ,jesus been silenced1 you would still be living the victims of superstition or persecution4 ,you would have been afraid of being struck with blindness1 or haunted with an evil spirit1 or even of being rooted out of the world4 ,if a ray of ,divine light had visited your understanding1 and you had protested against these traditions1 you would have had to feel the weight of ,rabbinical persecution1 like ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,you would have been excommunicated like ,eleazar1 and if ,god had given you strength to remain faithful1 would have died excommunicated1 and have had a stone upon your coffin4 ,how is it that now you are free1 that you can think and act without any such fear8 ,is it because the ,talmud has altered8 ,no1 it is just what it was4 ,the conscientious believers in the ,talmud are just the same as their fathers1 and as conscientious men1 if they had the power1 they would think it their bounden duty to treat you1 as their predecessors treated ,eleazar4 ,but the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth delivers you2 and the followers of ,jesus of ,nazareth are your protectors against the rigour of the oral law1 and the intolerance of your brethren4 ,should not this fact1 then1 lead you to examine into the claims of that same ,nazarene8 ,how is it that if the principles of ,jesus of ,nazareth should ever become universal1 the world will be universally happy2 whereas if the principles of those who rejected him become universal1 the whole world will groan under superstition and cruelty8 ,what stronger testimony can there be to the justice of his claims1 and the injustice of his condemnation8 ,examine1 then1 into the other evidence1 and in the meanwhile protest against the principles of the ,talmud1 and endeavour to deliver your brethren4 ,there are multitudes of ,jews who still groan under the superstitious laws respecting the washing of hands4 ,in the book of daily prayer published here in ,london1 the ordinance of washing of hands is acknowledged as ,divine4 ,on the #aeast leaf1 col4 #b1 you will find the following blessing3-- 8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord our ,god6 ,king of the universe6 who hath sanctified us with his commandments1 and commanded us to cleanse our hands40 ,now this is a positive untruth2 ,god has not given the commandment respecting the washing of hands4 ,and yet here your prayer-book solemnly tells him that he has4 ,and this prayer-book has also put a rubric to this benediction1 8,when the children wash their hands in the morning1 they are taught to say the following blessing40 ,from which it appears that the ,jewish children in ,england are still taught to acknowledge the ,divine authority of the ,talmud1 for the only way in which that benediction can be defended1 is by saying that the oral law is ,divine1 and that its commandments were given by ,god4 ,it is therefore a holy and imperative duty on all those ,israelites who reject ,talmudic superstition and intolerance to have this benediction erased from their prayer-book1 and to preserve the children from the infection of that law which persecutes the living and insults the dead4 ,footnote #af3 ,jewish ,prayer-book1 p4 #aeb4 ,no4 ,,xi4 ,,rabbinic ,,artifices ,,respecting ,,leaven ,,at ,,the ,,passover4 ,one of the many bright features in the national character of ,israel is the devoted constancy1 with which they have1 in the most troublous times and under the most disastrous circumstances1 celebrated the anniversary of their first great national deliverance4 ,more than three thousand years have now rolled away since ,israel's ,god heard the cries of the first-born in ,egypt1 and by slaying the first-born of their enemies1 effected their salvation with a mighty hand and on outstretched arm4 ,and yet the memory of that great event is still fresh in the hearts of the nation1 and the children of ,israel1 wherever scattered1 in the wilds of ,poland1 the coasts of ,africa1 or the torrid regions of ,india1 as well as amongst ourselves1 are now making consentaneous preparation for the approaching festival4 ,such constancy and such devotion bespeak minds of no ordinary mould1 and naturally lead us to ask1 how is it that the ,lord does not now hear ,israel's cries and prayers1 which ascend from every region under heaven1 and restore them to that place in ,his dispensations and that rank amongst the sons of men1 which his ,word assigns to them8 ,a ,christian would give the answer suggested by the ,new ,testament1 but we waive that at present4 ,the oral law gives a reply the same in substance4 ,it tells us that the mass of the nation has obscured the light of ,divine revelation by the admixture of human inventions1 that1 therefore1 a restoration would only be the establishment of error1 and is consequently impossible4 ,we have already given some proofs of this assertion1 the ,rabbinical laws relating to the ,passover furnish us with many more1 and to these the season of the year now naturally refers us4 ,amongst the first directions relating to the ,passover1 the ,word of ,god gives this plain command1 8,even the first day shall ye put away leaven out of your houses40 7,exod4 xii4 #ae47 ,this is intelligible to the most illiterate1 and easy to be obeyed1 but the ,rabbles have superadded a mass of explanations and observances1 which tend only to perplex and to burden the conscience4 ,in the first place they are not satisfied with the honest endeavour of an ,israelite to obey the command of ,god1 unless he does it according to the form and manner which they prescribe4 1 8,what is meant by the putting away 7of leaven7 mentioned in the law8 ,it is this1 that a man annul it in his heart1 and count it as dust1 and intend in his heart to have no leaven whatever in his possession1 and that all the leaven in his possession shall be as dust1 and of no necessity whatever40 7,hilchoth ,chometz ,umatzah1 c4 ii4 #b47 ,here1 then1 they require a formal intention1 but they have also prepared a form of words in which to clothe it4 8,all manner of leaven that is in my possession1 which ,i have seen1 and which ,i have not seen2 which ,i have removed1 and which ,i have not removed1 shall be null1 and accounted as the dust of the earth40 7,levi's ,prayers for the ,passover1 fol4 #b1 col4 #a47 ,and to this form a rubric is added1 8,if the master is not at home1 he annuls the leaven wherever he is40 ,now this may at first sight appear as a very innocent ceremony1 but ,god warns us against all additions to ,his ,word and commandments4 ,it is in itself presumptuous1 and as connected with the ,rabbinical doctrine of merit1 must have an injurious tendency upon the minds of the multitude4 ,they will argue that by observing this form1 they have fulfilled a commandment1 and that consequently there is an additional sum of merit to be put to the credit side of their account1 as a set off against their transgressions4 ,and on the other hand1 if they forget to go through this form at the right hour1 and afterwards any leaven be found in their houses1 the ,rabbies bring them in guilty of transgressing two negative commandments1 which they say is a more heinous offence than disobeying the affirmative precepts4 8,therefore1 if a man does not annul 7the leaven7 before the sixth hour1 and afterwards from the sixth hour and onwards should find leaven1 which was on his mind and in his heart1 but he forgot it at the hour of removal1 and did not remove it2 ,behold1 such an one has transgressed the command1 #8,it shall not be seen with thee' 7,exod4 xiii4 #g71 and also the command1 #8,it shall not be found in your houses' 7,exod4 xii4 #ai71 for he neither removed it nor annulled it40 7,hilchoth ,chometz1 c4 iii4 #h47 ,now1 can you believe that this decision is from ,god who searcheth the heart8 ,can you believe that a man who had it in his mind and heart to remove a piece of leaven according to ,god's commandment1 but whilst removing the rest forgot this one piece1 is to be brought in guilty1 simply because he did not observe a mere form1 which ,god has nowhere commanded8 ,or that he would not have been guilty1 if he had repeated some half dozen words prescribed by men1 sinners like himself8 ,very different is the declaration of ,god himself1 1 8,because it was in thine heart0 7#a ,kings viii4 #ah73 he accepted the intention1 and gave it the blessing of obedience4 ,the ,rabbinic decision is1 therefore1 not of ,god1 and goes far towards overthrowing the claims of the whole oral law4 ,but the ,rabbies were not satisfied with this invention of annulling the leaven1 they have imposed upon the consciences of their followers another observance1 utterly unknown to ,moses1 and that is 1 the searching for leaven4 1 8,on the evening before the #adth of ,nisan1 before the coming out of the stars1 they are to search for the leaven by the light of a single wax taper3 and when the time draws near1 it is unlawful to do any work1 or to eat1 or to study40 7,passover ,prayers1 fol4 #a1 col4 #b47 ,for this command there is evidently no foundation in the law of ,moses4 ,it is confessedly of the words of the ,scribes1 and yet the most minute directions are given1 and the greatest attention required1 as if it had been from ,god himself1 and various cases supposed where a second search is necessary1 as for instance3-- 1 8,if1 after the search1 he see a mouse come into the house with leaven in his mouth1 it is necessary to search a second time4 ,and although he should find the crumbs about the house1 he is not to say1 the mouse has eaten the bread long since1 and these are the crumbs1 but1 on the contrary1 he must fear lest it should have left the leaven in a hole or a window1 and these crumbs were there before2 he must therefore search again4 ,if he find nothing1 then he must search the whole house2 but if he find the bread with which the mouse went off1 then no further search is necessary40 ,another case of equal importance1 and more ingenuity1 is the following3-- 4 4 4 8,if a mouse enter a house with bread in his mouth1 and a mouse also go out of the same house with bread in his mouth1 one may conclude that this is one and the self-same mouse1 and it is not necessary to search4 ,but if the former that entered was black1 and the latter that went out white1 a search is necessary4 ,if a mouse went in with bread in his mouth1 and a weasel come out with bread in her mouth1 it is necessary to search4 ,if a mouse and a weasel both go out1 and bread in the weasel's mouth1 there is no search required1 for this is the identical bread that had been before in the mouse's mouth40 7,hilchoth ,chometz1 c4 ii47 ,we do not mean to say that this sort of wisdom was never found in ,christians4 ,we are well aware that the scholastic divines display much of the same perverse ingenuity1 and the achievements of mice have figured in ,gentile theology too1 but we have renounced that whole system as contrary to the ,word of ,god4 ,you still adhere to the theology of the ,scribes1 and are now about to keep a solemn festival according to their ordinances4 ,and yet you see how poor their view of true piety1 and how perverse the application of their time and their ingenuity4 ,the most unlearned ,israelite who has read the law of ,moses in its simple dignity1 will know very well that when ,god commanded the ,israelites to remove leaven from their houses1 he did not mean that they should go and rummage out the mouse-holes1 or spend their time looking after mice and weasels4 ,if1 instead of the oral law1 you had read this in the ,new ,testament1 would you not have taken it as complete evidence against the claims of that book8 and if ,st4 ,paul or ,st4 ,peter had given such commands to the ,gentile converts1 would you not have said1 these men were either fools or knaves8 ,but in the ,new ,testament nothing like it is to be found4 ,the precepts there given1 and the instruction there conveyed1 is all of a noble and dignified character1 whilst the trifling and the folly still exist in the oral law handed down by those who rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,if the testimony of men at all depends upon the wisdom of him who gives it1 the testimony of the ,scribes is not worth much4 ,but the trifling is exceeded by the presumption4 ,these men have said1 as we have quoted above from your prayer-book1 8that when the time for the search draws near1 it is unlawful to do any work1 or to eat1 or to study20 so that the poor man is to give up his lawful business1 the hungry man to abstain from his lawful food1 and all to neglect even the reading of ,god's holy ,word1 in order to go and search into holes and corners1 for that which they know is not to be found1 or to find that which was laid in their way intentionally and for that very purpose4 ,we ask you can this be from ,god1 or1 are the men who make the reading of ,god's ,word give way to this ceremony1 to be depended upon as teachers of the true religion8 ,but the oral law not only adds human inventions1 but lays down principles which involve considerable difficulties1 the solution of which requires no small share of ingenuity4 ,for instance-- 8,it is for ever unlawful to have any profit from leaven1 that has existed during the season of the ,passover40 ,this is understood of leaven belonging to ,israelites1 and according to this all ,israelites are obliged to sell1 or give away1 or lose all the leaven which they may have at the commencement of ,passover1 and of course1 if they have much1 the loss would be very serious4 ,but the ,rabbies who have made the difficulty1 have also found various ways of evading it4 ,one is by pledging the leaven with a certain form of words-- 8,an ,israelite who has pawned his leaven to a ,gentile1 if he says to him1 in case ,i do not bring thee the money from this time to a certain day1 you have purchased this leaven from the present time2 then this leaven is considered as in the possession of the ,gentile1 and it is lawful after the ,passover40 7,hilchoth ,chometz1 c4 iv47 ,if1 therefore1 an ,israelite1 who has a large quantity of leaven1 wishes to keep the commandment of removing all leaven from his possession1 and at the time to be able to resume the possession after the ,passover2 and to have the worldly gain too1 as well the spiritual profit1 he has nothing to do but to pawn it with this form of words4 ,now we ask every ,jew of common sense1 whether this be not a mere trick1 an attempt to cheat one's own conscience1 an unworthy artifice to serve ,god1 and yet to avoid the loss which would result from a simple observance of the command8 ,it is plain that a man who acts thus has no real intention of renouncing the possession of the leaven4 ,and this is not a single case2 the oral law is rich in such cases1 as it allows a mock pawning1 so it allows a mock sale or gift4 1 8,although the ,israelite knows that the ,gentile will not touch the leaven at all1 but keep it for him until after the ,passover1 and will then return it to him1 it is lawful40 ,of course a learned ,israelite1 acquainted with this provision of the oral law1 will select a ,gentile of this description to whom to sell or give his leaven1 fully aware that after ,passover it will be his again1 and he may enjoy the profit4 ,but suppose a ,jew had lent money to a ,gentile1 and received the interest every week in bread1 what is he to do8 ,it is evident that at ,passover he cannot make use of the bread on account of the leaven1 neither after the ,passover can he receive that bread nor money for it1 as according to the oral law he must have no profit from leaven which has witnessed the ,paschal week4 ,this is a difficult case1 but it is not of our making4 ,the oral law which has proposed the difficulty1 has also provided a solution4 8,an ,israelite who receives bread from a ,gentile every week as interest1 is1 according to ,avi ,haezri1 to tell him before the ,passover1 that in the ,passover week he must give him flour or money1 and then when they come to make up their accounts1 he may receive from him that which he did not receive during the ,passover40 7,arbah4 ,turim4 ,orach ,chaiim1 sec4 #dej47 ,according to this simple device1 merely by saying a few words1 he can make that lawful1 which before would have been a great sin4 ,it is not needful even to intend to have money or flour1 he may intend to have the leaven after the ,passover2 the words have the transforming efficacy4 ,the same book gives ,rashi's solution of another similar difficulty4 1 8,a question proposed to ,rashi--,suppose that an ,israelite and a ,gentile had an oven in partnership1 shall he say to the ,gentile1 ,take thou the profit during the ,passover1 and ,i will take afterwards8 ,he replied1 ,let him make a bargain before the ,passover1 and take the price of that week40 7,ibid47 ,a man of common sense will see that here1 as in the other cases1 the ,jew does really receive the profit from leaven in existence during the ,passover1 and that whether he receive the money or the profit before or afterwards1 there is no real difference in the circumstances of the transaction2 one principle pervades all these decisions1 and that is1 evasion of what is considered a ,divine command4 ,the man who gives away the leaven with the full intention of resuming possession after the ,passover1 and the man who sells only for the week1 in full persuasion that his right and interest remain1 does in reality neither give nor sell4 ,there may be an outward appearance of the thing1 but ,god does not judge according to the appearance2 he looks on the intention of the heart4 ,he is not satisfied with the form of giving or selling1 but looking at the inmost thoughts of the soul1 ,he sees that the man does not wish nor intend to do either one or the other1 and marks him as a deliberate1 and wilful transgressor4 ,but we appeal to every unsophisticated mind in ,israel1 would such a system of evasion be considered as honourable1 even according to the maxims of this world8 ,or can that conduct1 which men would call dishonourable1 be considered as an acceptable service before ,god8 ,but1 above all1 can it be the law given to ,moses by the ,god of truth8 ,this it is which gives this discussion all its importance4 ,if the ,talmud and all its decisions were retained merely as a curious remnant of antiquity1 as the effusions of a perverse ingenuity1 or the waking dreams of scholastics1 we might both pass it by with a smile4 ,but it is proposed as the law of ,god4 ,it is the religion of the great majority of the ,jewish people1 and no doubt at this very time1 many an ,israelite in ,poland and elsewhere1 if not in ,england1 is preparing a mock sale1 or drawing up a contract for the imaginary disposal of the leaven in his possession1 in obedience to the above directions4 ,they do it in simplicity1 with a mistaken devotion4 ,they are misled2 but does not a fearful load of responsibility rest upon those ,israelites who know better1 and yet leave their brethren in this grievous error1 yea1 and confirm them in it by joining in all the ceremonies which that system prescribes8 ,because of this system1 the nation is still exiled from the land of ,israel4 ,because of this system1 the anger of the ,lord is not turned away1 but ,his arm is stretched out still4 ,if then you love your people--if you desire their national exaltation1 and their eternal welfare1 lift up your voice and protest against the oral law4 ,condemn the ,scribes and ,pharisees as the inventors of the system1 and the first authors of that moral captivity in which the people has been held for so many centuries4 ,now when you remember the mercies of the ,lord in delivering you from the house of bondage1 make an effort to deliver your brethren from the more degrading chains of error and superstition4 ,at the same time we would ask you to consider the case of so many of your nation1 who1 when these chains were rivetting1 gloriously maintained their freedom1 and have left us a collection of writings1 entirely free from every trace of this mistaken ingenuity4 ,we mean the disciples of ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,they1 too1 were ,jews1 children of ,abraham1 and of the stock of ,israel4 ,how is it then1 that they who were condemned by the ,talmudists as heretics1 and propagators of a false religion1 have left us the principles of a healthy1 manly1 and rational piety1 whilst their judges and accusers have fallen headlong into error and even absurdity8 ,if ,jesus and his disciples were deceivers or fanatics1 how is it that they were preserved from inculcating such false doctrines3 and if the ,scribes and ,pharisees were right in condemning and persecuting them--were actually serving ,god in resisting false pretensions1 how is it that they were given over to such delusions1 and to such a system of trifling8 ,that they were not infallible1 the above extracts from the oral law prove beyond all controversy4 ,they have altogether erred in the first element of acceptable worship1 simplicity of intention and uprightness of heart4 ,they have confounded the form with the reality of obedience to ,god's commands4 ,and in all these things where they have erred1 ,jesus and his disciples have asserted and maintained the truth4 ,account for this fact4 ,the ,talmud tells you to light a taper and search for leaven in a mousehole1 and to get rid of all in your possession by a fictitious contract4 ,the ,new ,testament says1 8,purge out the old leaven1 that ye may be a new lump1 as ye are unleavened4 ,for even ,christ our ,passover is sacrificed for us3 therefore let us keep the feast not with old leaven1 neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness2 but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth40 7#a ,cor4 v4 #g1 #h47 ,no4 ,,xii4 ,,the ,,passover ,a ,,type ,,of ,,future ,,deliverance4 ,this year1 the ,jewish and the ,christian times for celebrating the ,feast of the ,passover nearly coincide2 and the coincidence ought to remind us both of that happy period1 when all the children of man1 so long divided1 shall again be united into one great1 holy1 and happy family2 all rejoicing in the mercy and favour of their ,heavenly ,father1 and all loving each other in sincerity and truth4 ,to that period we look forward1 and even now we use our humble endeavours to accelerate its approach4 ,yea1 one of the reasons1 why we endeavour to lead ,israel to a rejection of the oral law1 is because we firmly believe that it is one of the main hindrances in the way of their happiness and that of the nations of the world4 ,we have no wish to rob you of any one blessing promised in the ,word of ,god4 ,we would not deprive you of one hope founded upon ,god's promises4 ,on the contrary1 we rejoice to think that notwithstanding all the vain traditions of the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 it has pleased ,god to keep alive in your hearts the memory of his past mercy1 and the hope of his future goodness4 ,to the consideration of these two points1 the law of ,moses and your appointed prayers lead you at this season1 and through the mercy of ,god1 and the love of some of your brethren1 we of the ,gentiles have been brought to rejoice in similar considerations4 ,let us then endeavour to anticipate the future1 and rejoice together even now1 omitting on this solemn occasion a special discussion of the oral law4 ,if ,god's mercy were all past1 and only a matter of history1 we might and ought to feel grateful for the benefits bestowed upon our fathers3 our joy would1 however1 suffer a considerable diminution4 ,but this is not the case4 ,in the midst of your grateful acknowledgment for the wonders in ,egypt1 you can mingle a prayer for the future1 and say1 8,next year in ,jerusalem40 1 8,o ,lord our ,god1 have mercy1 we beseech thee1 upon ,israel thy people1 and upon ,jerusalem thy city1 and upon thine altar1 and upon thy temple2 and build ,jerusalem1 the holy city1 speedily1 in our days1 and bring us up into the midst of it1 and make us glad therein40 7,haggadah ,shel ,pesach47 ,and to this prayer we can say1 8,amen0 with all our hearts4 ,the future restoration and blessedness of ,israel is one of our fondest expectations2 and whilst we contemplate the circumstances and the glory of the first ,exodus1 the ,word of the living ,god leads us to look forward to that which is to come4 8,according to the days of thy coming out of the land of ,egypt will ,i show unto him marvellous things10 is the promise by the mouth of ,micah the prophet 7c4 vii4 #aj74 1 8,and the ,lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the ,egyptian sea1 and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river1 and shall smite it in the seven streams1 and shall make men go over dry shod4 ,and there shall be a highway for the remnant of his people1 which shall be left from ,assyria2 like as it was to ,israel in the day that he came up out of the land of ,egypt10 is the declaration of the ,prophet ,isaiah 7xi4 #ae1 #af74 ,seeing that neither of these declarations was fulfilled at the return from ,babylon1 nor at any period since1 we firmly believe that they shall be fulfilled in the time to come1 and that therefore the compilers of the ,haggadah were fully warranted in intermingling1 with their ,passover thanksgivings1 a prayer for the fulfilment of the promised mercies2 and we do not scruple to say that in this respect1 the ,jewish ,rabbies have been right1 whilst many ,christian interpreters have been wrong2 though they might have known and given a true explanation of all similar passages1 if they had only followed the plain words of their master1 ,jesus of ,nazareth1 8,think not that ,i am come to destroy the law or the prophets40 7,matt4 v4 #ag47 ,we make this remark to show that we do not condemn the ,rabbies inconsiderately2 but that we are willing to do them all justice1 where their opinions agree with the ,word of ,god4 ,their expectation of the future restoration of ,israel is well founded1 and their faith in the promises relating to it worthy of all imitation4 ,oh1 that the whole nation had more of it--that their hearts were more directed to the land of their forefathers--that their thoughts were more full of the ,divine promises4 ,then they would cry more earnestly to ,god1 and ,he would 8hear their groaning1 and remember his covenant with ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob10 as he did at the deliverance from ,egypt4 ,the careless and the ungodly deceive themselves with the idea1 that when ,god's time comes1 the deliverance will take place without any endeavour of theirs4 ,let them read the law of ,moses1 and they will find that though ,god had promised to bring their fathers out of ,egypt1 the deliverance itself was preceded by a time of prayer and crying unto ,god4 ,to ,abraham he had said1 444 8,know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs1 and shall serve them2 and they shall afflict them four hundred years4444 ,but in the fourth generation they shall come hither again10 c4 7,gen4 xv4 #ac1 #af47 ,but this promise was no warrant for their remaining careless1 and at ease2 it was on the contrary a basis for earnest prayer and supplication1 and a plea for mercy4 ,and1 therefore1 when the time drew near1 we read1 8,and the children of ,israel sighed by reason of the bondage1 and they cried1 and their cry came up unto ,god1 by reason of the bondage40 ,and ,god himself gives this as one reason why he came to deliver them4 8,now1 therefore1 behold the cry of the children of ,israel is come unto me40 7,exod4 iii4 #i47 ,here1 then1 all ,israelites1 who desire the fulfilment of ,god's promises should learn that state of mind1 which is a pre-requisite to the interposition of their great deliverer4 ,israel can no more be delivered now than of old1 unless they earnestly desire deliverance4 ,to what purpose should ,he deliver and restore those1 who care nothing about the land of their forefathers1 nor about the glory of the nation--who say1 ,we are very comfortable and happy here1 and all we desire is to be like the other nations 7 7--what good would it do to us to return to the land of ,israel8 ,god's promises are not to such grovelling and unbelieving spirits4 ,along with his promise of mercy1 he gives a command for continual supplication1 1 8,ye that make mention of the ,lord1 keep not silence1 and give him no rest1 till he establish1 and till he make ,jerusalem a praise in the earth40 7,isaiah lxii4 #f1 #g47 ,and in ,ezekiel1 after the declaration1 8,this land that was desolate is become like the garden of ,eden2 and the waste1 and desolate and ruined cities1 are become fenced1 and are inhabited10 c41 he adds-- 8,thus saith the ,lord ,god1 ,i will yet for this be inquired of by the house of ,israel1 to do it for them40 7,ezek4 xxxvi4 #cg47 ,upon which ,rashi remarks-- 8,i will be made favourable to them through their prayer1 when they seek me with regard to this40 ,hence prayer is commanded2 in ,hosea we are told1 that without prayer deliverance is impossible4 8,i will go and return to my place1 till they acknowledge their offence1 and seek my face40 7,hosea v4 #ae47 ,let the children of ,israel return then1 and seek the ,lord their ,god1 and ,david their ,king1 then they shall fear the ,lord and ,his goodness in the latter days4 7,hosea iii4 #e47 ,in the consideration of the deliverance from ,egypt there is1 however1 one circumstance which should teach the ,israelites to rejoice with trembling1 and that is1 that the majority of those1 who went forth from ,egypt1 never entered the land of ,israel1 but died in the wilderness on account of their sin and unbelief4 ,that which has happened1 may happen again4 ,israel might be delivered again from the lands of their dispersion1 and be led forth with a mighty hand1 and outstretched arm1 and with great signs and wonders1 and yet after all die in their sins4 ,indeed1 it is not merely a legitimate deduction from the past1 but an express prophecy of the future4 8,as ,i live1 saith the ,lord ,god1 surely1 with a mighty hand1 and with a stretched out arm1 and with fury poured out1 will ,i rule over you2 and ,i will bring you out from the people1 and will gather you out of the countries wherein ye are scattered1 and with a mighty hand1 and with a stretched out arm1 and with fury poured out4 ,and ,i will bring you into the wilderness of the people1 and there will ,i plead with you face to face4 ,like as ,i pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of ,egypt1 so will ,i plead with you1 saith the ,lord ,god4 ,and ,i will cause you to pass under the rod1 and ,i will bring you into the bond of the covenant40 8,and ,i will purge out from among you the rebels1 and them that transgress against me2 ,i will bring them forth from the country where they sojourn1 and they shall not enter into the land of ,israel40 7,ezek4 xx4 #cc-ch47 ,here then we see1 whether we consider the past or the future1 that a mere temporal deliverance is not sufficient--that ,god's greatest temporal blessings1 and even his mighty signs and wonders1 may lead us in the more dreadful and fatal captivity of sin4 ,surely if a miraculous deliverance could deliver the soul1 those that saw the miracles in ,egypt1 and experienced the ,lord's mercy in their preservation from the destroying angel1 and in the passage through the ,red ,sea1 ought to have been perfect in holiness4 ,yet we find1 after all that they saw and heard1 that they were a disobedient and faithless generation1 and that they perished in the wilderness4 ,the history1 then1 of this great deliverance reminds us in the most forcible manner of the bondage of sin1 and the necessity of a more noble and gracious emancipation4 ,israel was in bondage in ,egypt1 and the ,lord had compassion and delivered them4 ,all mankind1 ,jews and ,gentiles1 are born slaves to sin1 and dreadful is the misery which they have suffered1 and hopeless the prospect for the future1 unless ,god have provided a way of escape4 ,now is it likely that that ,god who had compassion on the ,israelites in their temporal affliction1 should look1 unmoved and unpitying1 upon the temporal and spiritual wretchedness of the whole human race8 ,is it conceivable that those gracious ears1 which heard the cries of ,israel in ,egypt1 should be deaf to the groans and lamentations of all the sons of men8 ,is it consistent with the ,bible-character of ,god to provide a remedy for temporal sorrow1 and yet furnish no means of deliverance from everlasting woe8 ,is it like our ,heavenly ,father to stretch out his hand to save a few of his children from ,egypt1 and yet leave the great majority to perish in ignorance and sin8 ,blessed be ,god1 who1 in his great mercy1 sent ,jews to our forefathers to tell us of the blood of another and greater passover1 which can preserve ,gentiles as well as ,jews from the wrath to come4 8,messiah1 our passover1 is sacrificed for us20 and therefore we too keep the feast1 and join in the hymn of thanksgiving1 8,blessed be the ,lord ,god of ,israel1 for ,he hath visited and redeemed his people40 ,you remember the paschal lamb of ,egypt4 ,we can say-- 8,behold the ,lamb of ,god1 that taketh away the sin of the world40 ,you remember the sprinkling of blood that delivered your fathers from temporal death4 ,we rejoice because1 8,the blood of ,jesus1 the ,messiah1 cleanseth us from all sin40 ,you remember how1 four days before the ,passover1 it was necessary to select a lamb without spot and without blemish4 ,we think of the true ,paschal ,lamb1 the ,messiah1 how1 four days before the great sacrifice1 he came up to ,jerusalem1 and was examined before the tribunals1 and declared to be without sin4 ,pilate's testimony was1 8,ye have brought this man unto me1 as one that perverteth the people2 and1 behold1 ,i1 having examined him before you1 have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him3 no1 nor yet ,herod3 for ,i sent you to him2 and lo1 nothing worthy of death is done unto him40 7,luke xxiii4 #ad1 #ae47 ,you remember how the destroying angel passed over the houses where the blood was sprinkled3 we look forward to that more dreadful time1 when he shall come as the ,psalmist describes3-- 1 4 8,our ,god shall come1 and shall not keep silence3 a fire shall devour before him1 and it shall be very tempestuous round about him4 ,he shall call to the heavens from above1 and to the earth1 that he may judge his people4 ,gather my saints together unto me3 those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice40 7,ps4 l4 #c-e47 ,and we hope to be found amongst that number1 and that the blood of the true ,sacrifice will then deliver us4 ,it is evident that the ,psalmist here is not speaking of the sacrifices of the temple1 for immediately after we read-- 4 4 8,hear1 ,o my people1 and ,i will speak2 ,o ,israel1 and ,i will testify against thee3 ,i am ,god1 even thy ,god4 ,i will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt offerings1 to have been continually before me4 ,i will take no bullock out of thy house1 nor he goats out of thy folds40 ,here ,god plainly excepts the offerings of bulls and goats1 and thereby overthrows the exposition of ,rashi and others1 who say that the covenant and sacrifices here alluded to are the same as those described at the giving of the law1 when ,moses said1 8,behold the blood of the covenant10 c4 7,exod4 xxiv4 #h47 ,the sacrifices then offered were 8burnt-offerings and peace-offerings of oxen10 which ,god here declares that he will not accept4 ,besides1 ,god is not speaking of many sacrifices1 but of one sacrifice 4 ,he is moreover speaking of one great sacrifice1 by virtue of which sinful men may stand before him as saints at the great day of judgment1 and obtain mercy4 ,this certainty cannot mean the sacrifices of the ,mosaic covenant at ,sinai1 for by reason of that sacrifice1 they will appear as guilty sinners who have broken ,god's covenant1 as he himself says-- 8,which my covenant they brake40 7,jer4 xxxi4 #cb47 ,at that solemn hour the ,mosaic covenant will only condemn1 and therefore cannot be meant here4 ,indeed the rabbies appear to have felt the untenableness of this exposition1 and therefore invented another figurative one-- 8,there is also an allegorical interpretation referring it to the covenant of circumcision1 which ,israel has faithfully adhered to in the captivity40 7,kimchi1 in loc47 ,but this exposition is as unfounded as the former4 ,circumcision is never called a sacrifice in ,scripture4 ,neither will it serve a man in the day of judgment4 ,what then is the sacrifice which is here intended8 ,we answer1 the true ,passover1 the blood of the ,messiah1 whereby the new covenant is ratified4 ,some object that the shedding of blood is altogether unnecessary--that if ,god will forgive at all1 he can forgive without atonement or sacrifice4 ,but this objection will equally affect the sacrifice of the first ,passover4 ,on the very same grounds1 we may say1 ,what necessity was there for killing a lamb1 and sprinkling its blood upon the door-posts8 ,the directions given by ,moses are very striking--8,kill the passover4 ,and ye shall take a bunch of hyssop1 and dip it in the blood that is in the bason1 and strike the lintel and the two side posts with the blood that is in the bason2 and none of you shall go out at the door of his house until the morning4 ,for the ,lord will pass through to smite the ,egyptians2 and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel1 and on the two side posts1 the ,lord will pass over the door1 and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you40 7,exod4 xii4 #ba-bc47 ,surely the blood was not necessary to make known to him which house belonged to an ,israelite4 ,he could have saved them as well without the blood as with it4 ,why then destroy the life of a lamb1 and give them all this trouble8 ,suppose that an ,israelite had thus argued at that time1 had refused to kill the passover1 or having killed it1 had neglected to sprinkle the blood1 or having done both1 was not content to abide in his house1 but had gone forth before the morning1 what would have been the consequence8 ,certain punishment4 ,god was indeed determined to save ,israel1 but only in a certain way3 and he that did not choose to submit to ,god's method1 would naturally lose the benefit of his appointment4 ,our business is not to argue with ,god1 but having ascertained ,his will1 to submit to it4 ,inquire1 then1 what ,god means by 8his saints who have made a covenant with ,him by sacrifice20 and endeavour to enter into that covenant1 that when ,he appears to judgment1 ye may be gathered unto ,him4 ,if the ,christian view be not the true one1 then since the destruction of the temple there has been no sacrifice1 and no way of entering into that covenant with ,him4 ,you observe the season--you abstain from leaven--but there is no sacrifice4 ,the main1 yea the essential1 element of the ,passover is wanting4 ,the lamb cannot be slain4 ,and even if it could be1 if you had again a temple and a high-priest1 and all the service of a sanctuary1 still the sacrifice of the ,passover would only be a memorial of mercies long since gone by4 ,it would be no real atonement for your sins1 and when you had slain it1 and eaten of it1 the question would still remain1 ,how am ,i1 a sinner1 to appear in the presence of the righteous ,judge8 ,the first part of this paper will have shown you1 that we are firm believers in the future glory and blessedness of ,israel2 that we do not1 therefore1 in offering you our hope for eternity1 wish to deprive you of your own hopes for time4 ,no1 we wish you every blessing which ,god has promised by the mouth of ,moses and the prophets1 and can affectionately join in the words-- ,if it should please ,god to spare us all to see the re-union of all the families of the earth1 we should rejoice to unite with others in acknowledging 8that ye are the seed whom the ,lord has blessed40 ,but we should rejoice a thousandfold more to meet you in the heavenly ,jerusalem1 and to mingle our voices with yours in singing1 8,worthy is the ,lamb that was slain to receive power1 and riches1 and wisdom1 and strength1 and honour1 and glory1 and blessing40 ,amen4 ,no4 ,,xiii4 ,,severity ,,of ,,the ,,rabbinic ,,ordinances4 ,the feast of the ,passover1 ordained as a memorial of past mercies1 has at the same time served to remind us of another deliverance necessary both for ,jew and ,gentile1 and also of a happy time when 8there shall be one fold and one shepherd0--8,one ,,lord and ,his name ,one40 ,but the blessed anticipations of the future cannot1 and ought not1 withdraw our thoughts from the reality of the present4 ,that happy time is not yet come4 ,jews and ,christians are not yet agreed as to the articles of faith2 and this feast of the ,passover especially directs our attention to the cause and origin of the difference4 ,at this solemn season of the year1 ,jesus of ,nazareth was condemned by the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 and by them delivered to the ,roman power to be executed as a malefactor4 ,one portion of the ,jewish nation1 and that the majority1 concurred in the judgment of the rulers4 ,another portion1 at first small1 but ultimately considerable in number and station1 arraigned the justice of the sentence1 and professed their faith in ,his ,messiahship4 ,the question between ,jews and ,christians at present is1 which of these two portions of the ,jewish nation was in the right4 ,in these papers we have taken up this simple position1 that the religious system of those who rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth is contrary to the law and the prophets1 and is therefore false2 whilst the doctrines of ,him1 that was rejected1 are in conformity with those writings1 and must therefore be true4 ,when we say that the rabbinical system is false1 we do not mean that the ,pharisees held no truth4 ,on the contrary1 we showed in our last number that some of their expectations were agreeable to the ,word of ,god1 and therefore true4 ,all we intend is1 that the peculiarities of ,rabbinism of which the system is composed are erroneous4 ,the laws relating to the present festival furnish us with abundant proof of our assertion4 ,the ,divine commands relating to it exhibit the care1 consideration1 and condescension of ,god in providing an opportunity of instruction1 a time of relaxation1 and a season of joy for the poor as well as the rich4 ,the rabbinical laws1 on the other hand1 are burdensome1 oppressive1 and hurtful1 especially to the poor and unlearned4 ,we take our first proof from one of the laws relating to the 8the four cups0--,god has given a simple command to ,israel to make known to their children the reasons for the feast4 8,and thou shalt declare unto thy son in that day1 saying1 ,this is done because of that which the ,lord did unto me1 when ,i came forth out of ,egypt40 7,exod4 xiii4 #h47 ,in order to fulfil this command1 a sort of liturgy has been composed1 much of which is solemn and beautiful3 and a ceremonial appointed1 of which one ordinance is1 that there should be four cups or glasses of wine4 8,all persons1 whether men or women1 are obligated on this night to drink four cups 7or glasses7 of wine1 and this number is not to be diminished40 7,hilchoth ,chometz1 c4 vii47 ,as to the ceremony of the four cups1 the circumstances connected with them evidently show that they are not for the purpose of revelry1 but part of a solemn religious observance4 4 4 4 4 8,over each of these four cups a benediction is to be pronounced4 ,over the first cup is said the consecration of the day4 ,over the second cup the ,haggadah is read4 ,over the third cup the benediction for food is pronounced4 ,and over the fourth the ,hallel is completed1 and the benediction for the song pronounced40 7,ibid47 ,with a solemn religious ordinance it is not for us to find fault4 ,on the contrary1 in these and their other prayers1 we earnestly wish the ,jews the blessing of ,god1 and the spirit of grace and supplication4 ,but when we find this human institution imposed as a burden upon the conscience1 and the observance of it exacted from those who have not the means of gaining their daily bread1 we must protest against it as harsh and oppressive4 ,now in the oral law this requirement is made4 1 8,whosoever has not got wine transgresses a command of the ,rabbies1 for they have said1 that there is to be no diminution from the four cups4 ,and it is necessary to sell what he has in order to keep the command of the wise men4 ,he is not to depend upon the bread1 for if he fulfil the command concerning one cup1 he has not fulfilled that respecting the three4 ,therefore let him sell what he has1 and furnish the expense1 until he procure wine or raisins40 7,arbah ,tur4 ,orach ,chaiim1 #dhc47 ,it may be replied1 that the congregation furnishes those who have not the means4 ,but what is to become of those who have displeased the dispensers of the congregation's bounty1 or what is a ,jew to do1 who is living alone in the midst of ,gentiles1 as is frequently the case1 particularly in this country8 ,if he be a conscientious ,rabbinist he must either grieve his conscience by transgression1 or sell what he may not be well able to spare4 ,the same may also be said of the unleavened cakes4 ,the ,rabbies have given so many directions about the lawful mode of preparing them1 as to make it almost impossible for a ,jew1 living at a distance from a congregation1 to keep the command1 and to keep the poor in a state of perpetual bondage to the synagogue1 if they wish to be supplied by the bounty of the congregation4 ,but if this utter want of consideration for the poor is more strikingly displayed in the institution and exaction of a second holy day1 where ,god has required the observance of only one1 as the ,rabbies themselves acknowledge in the following passage3-- 4 8,these are the six days on which the ,scripture has forbidden the doing of work4 ,the first and seventh day of ,passover3 the first and eighth day of the ,feast of ,tabernacles3 the day of the ,feast of ,weeks1 and the first day of the seventh month2 and these days are called holy days4 ,the sabbatism of all is alike2 it is unlawful on them to do any manner of work1 excepting that which is necessary for the preparation of food1 as it is said1 #8,save that which every man must eat4' 7,exod4 xii4 #af470 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov41 c4 i4 #a47 ,here is an express recognition of what ,god has commanded4 ,and yet the ,scribes were not content with this ordinance of ,god1 but have appointed the observance of a second day on all these occasions1 and have annexed the sentence of excommunication to any transgression of their command4 1 1 8,to us1 who observe two days1 every thing that is forbidden on the first day1 is also forbidden on the second day2 and whosoever makes light of it1 is to be excommunicated4 ,but if he be an acute ,talmudist the excommunication is not to be severe1 only he is to be beaten40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #dif47 ,in the ,yad ,hachasakah we find the same severity1 and the same exception4 4 8,although the second holy day is only of the words of the ,scribes1 every thing that is forbidden on the first day1 is forbidden on it also4 ,and every one who professes the second holy day1 even that of the new year1 whether it be in a matter relating to the sabbatism1 or by work1 or by going beyond the ,sabbath limit1 is to receive the beating denounced against rebellion1 or to be excommunicated1 unless he be a learned man40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov41 c4 i4 #bd47 ,the hardship1 oppression1 and severity of this ordinance are apparent at first sight1 and are severely felt by many a poor ,jew in this city1 who hardly knows how to get bread for himself and his children4 ,in every case it robs him in one week of two days1 on which ,god has allowed him to work1 and to endeavour to gain a livelihood4 ,but if the first day of a festival happen on a ,thursday1 then that day1 ,friday1 and ,saturday1 he dare not do anything to earn the means of subsistence for his family4 ,sunday is the ,christian ,sabbath1 so that in one week four successive days are lost1 and in the following week four more4 ,what1 then1 is the poor man to do8 ,if he does not work1 his children may starve2 if he makes use of the time allowed him by his merciful ,god1 and pursues his daily occupations1 he transgresses a command of unmerciful men1 and renders himself obnoxious to his more bigoted brethren4 ,true that they cannot now beat him with the stripes awarded to the rebellious1 and that they would hardly dare1 in the present state of things1 to excommunicate him2 yet there are other ways and means of persecution more secret1 but equally sure4 ,but whatever be the present circumstances1 the cruel and oppressive spirit of the oral law remains the same4 ,if the ,rabbinists had the power1 they would soon proceed to excommunicate and flog all the profaners of the second holy day4 ,we appeal1 then1 to the common sense of every ,jew1 and ask him1 ,what right have men to rob the poor of that time which ,god hath given them8 or to sentence a man who only goes to get bread for his children1 and in so doing transgresses none of ,god's commandments1 to excommunication or flogging1 especially to that severe species of flogging here specified8 ,the flogging here spoken of is called 1 8the flogging of rebellion10 and is altogether different from that merciful punishment prescribed in the law4 ,god says1 8,and it shall be1 if the wicked man be worthy to be beaten1 that the judge shall cause him to lie down1 and to be beaten before his face1 according to his fault by a certain number4 ,forty stripes he may give him1 and not exceed2 lest1 if he should exceed1 and beat him above these with many stripes1 then thy brother should seem vile to thee40 7,deut4 xxv4 #b1 #c47 ,here1 as everywhere else1 in the midst of judgment1 ,god remembers mercy4 ,the ,rabbies1 never satisfied unless they can add to1 or diminish from1 ,god's commandments1 have reduced the number to thirty-nine1 lest they should make any mistake4 ,but to compensate for this diminution1 they have invented 8the flogging of rebellion10 which is without number and without mercy1 as may be seen from the following explanation of the ,baal ,aruch3-- 8,whosoever transgresses an affirmative commandment1 for instance1 he was commanded to make a tabernacle1 or a lulav1 and did not1 he is to be beaten until his soul go out1 without any consideration of his strength1 and without dividing the flogging into three4 ,and1 in like manner1 whosoever transgresses the words of the wise men1 he is to be beaten without number1 and without consideration4 ,why is this called the flogging of rebellion8 ,because he has rebelled against the words of the law and against the words of the ,scribes40 7,baal ,aruch1 in voc47 ,this1 then1 is the punishment denounced against those who try to get bread for their children on the second holy day2 a punishment invented by the ,rabbies themselves1 not against the immoral or the irreligious1 but against the transgressors of their own commandments4 ,what could have been the spirit1 the temper1 the religious feeling of such men8 ,had they any perception of the merciful character of the law1 or any resemblance to the compassionate nature of the ,god of ,israel8 ,can you put any confidence in the religious instruction of those who would excommunicate or flog a fellow-creature to death because he obeyed the instincts of nature1 because he could not stay at home and listen to the cries of his famishing children1 but went forth1 to procure them food in the manner1 and on the day which ,god had permitted him to do so8 ,these are the men who condemned ,jesus of ,nazareth to death1 and this is the religion of the oral law1 which you prefer to the mild and merciful doctrines of ,christianity4 ,if ,rabbinism had continued in its power1 you would have been exposed to all the severity of this intolerance4 ,the triumph of ,christianity has1 in this respect1 also been a blessing to the ,jewish nation1 and the power of the followers of ,jesus of ,nazareth protects you from excommunication and corporal chastisement4 ,the cruelty and hardship of the imposition of a second holy day1 with such a punishment annexed appears not only from the circumstance of its being altogether a human institution1 but further1 that the original object of its institution has long since ceased4 ,the ,scribes appointed the observance of two days at a time1 when the feast-days were fixed by the appearance of the moon1 lest those at a distance from ,jerusalem should keep a wrong day1 but now that they are fixed by calculation1 this is altogether unnecessary4 8,in the present time1 when there is no ,sanhedrin1 nor house of judgment in the land of ,israel1 the feasts are fixed by calculation1 and therefore all places1 even those that are remote from the land of ,israel1 ought properly to observe only one day as a holy day1 as well as the inhabitants of that country1 for all depend on and fix the feast by one and the same calculation2 but it is an ordinance of the wise men to adhere diligently to the custom of their forefathers40 7,hilchoth ,kiddush ,hachodesh1 c4 v4 #e47 ,there is1 therefore1 no excuse for this burden imposed upon the poor1 and much less for the cruel punishments1 denounced against those who cease to observe what is confessedly an useless custom4 ,how different is the doctrine of ,christianity with respect to such days4 ,no excommunication1 no flogging1 no imposing of burdens upon the consciences of our brethren4 ,the ,new ,testament condemns even all rash judgment in such matters4 ,it says1 8,who art thou1 that judgeth another man's servant8 ,to his own master he standeth or falleth4 ,yea he shall be holden up1 for ,god is able to make him stand4 ,one man esteemeth one day above another2 another esteemeth every day alike4 ,let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind4 ,he that regardeth the day1 regardeth it to the ,lord2 and he that regardeth not the day1 to the ,lord he doth not regard it4 ,he that eateth1 eateth to the ,lord1 for he giveth ,god thanks2 and he that eateth not1 to the ,lord he eateth not1 and giveth ,god thanks4 ,for none of us liveth to himself1 and no man dieth to himself4 ,for whether we live1 we live onto the ,lord1 and whether we die1 we die unto the ,lord2 whether we live1 therefore1 or die1 we are the ,lord's40 7,rom4 xiv4 #b-h47 ,here is the spirit of love and mercy1 and therefore the spirit of ,god4 ,how is it1 then1 that ,jesus and his disciples were able to overcome the prejudices of their times1 and to stem the torrent of authority and learning1 which was altogether in favour of the opposite opinions8 ,how is it1 if they were impostors and deceivers that they have left a tolerant and merciful system1 whilst the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 who1 according to that supposition1 were the true servants of ,god1 have left a religion of oppression and cruelty8 8,ye shall know them by their fruits4 ,do men gather grapes of thorns1 or figs of thistles8 ,even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit1 and every evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit4 ,a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit1 neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit40 7,matt4 vii4 #af-ah47 ,this is certainly true in nature4 ,now the ,pharisees have brought forth evil fruit1 ,jesus of ,nazareth and his disciples have brought forth good fruit4 ,what is the conclusion from such premises8 ,but we have hitherto spoken only generally of the ,institution of a second holy day1 we have yet to consider the details of the commandment1 which will show still more clearly that 8,the ,scribes and ,pharisees bind heavy burdens1 and grievous to be borne1 and lay them on other men's shoulders40 7,matt4 xxiii4 #d47 ,they are1 as usual1 most exact in defining what is and is not work4 ,they say1 4 4 8,every thing that is unlawful on the ,sabbath1 either because it has the appearance of work1 or because it leads to work1 or on account of sabbatising1 is unlawful on a holy day1 unless it be necessary for the preparation of food1 and the like1 or such things as are allowed on the holy day1 as will be explained in these constitutions4 ,and every thing that it is unlawful to move on the ,sabbath1 is also unlawful to be moved on the holy day1 unless it be necessary for food3 and every thing that is lawful on the ,sabbath is lawful on a holy day40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov41 c4 i4 #ag47 ,this law effectually ties up the hands of the poor ,rabbinist4 ,he not only dare not pursue his trade1 but he dare not make any domestic arrangement1 that might promote order in his house1 or conduce to his comfort4 ,he must not write a letter to his friends1 nor even extinguish a fire1 though it be to save his property4 1 1 444 8,although it has been pronounced lawful to kindle fire on the holy day1 even where not absolutely necessary1 yet it is unlawful to extinguish fire1 even though it had been kindled for the preparation of food2 for the extinguishing of fire is work1 and is not at all necessary for the dressing of food4 ,and as fire is not to be extinguished1 so neither is a candle to be extinguished and whosoever extinguishes is to be flogged1 just as he that weaves or builds4444 ,fire is not to be extinguished1 in order to save property on a holy day1 no more than on the ,sabbath4 ,on the contrary1 one lets it burn and goes away40 7,ibid41 c4 iv4 #b1 #d47 ,in the ,arbah ,turim this law is laid down with still more precision4 4 4 8,it is unlawful to extinguish fire on a holy day1 even though a man should see his house burning4 ,it is unlawful to extinguish split wood1 either for the sake of saving it from being burned1 or to keep a pot from being smoked1 that is to say1 if he can keep it from being smoked without extinguishing the fire1 as by removing it from one fire to another4 ,but if he has not got another fire1 and if the pot must be smoked unless he extinguish it1 then the extinguishing is lawful1 that the pot may not be smoked40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #ead47 ,now we put it to the common sense of every ,jew1 whether in these laws there be justice1 mercy1 and religion2 or hardship1 inconsideration1 and absurdity8 ,no4 ,,xiv4 ,,severity ,,and ,,artifice4 ,the oral law says1 as we saw in our last1 that1 on a holy day1 it is unlawful to extinguish a fire in order to save a man's house and property1 but that it is lawful1 on the same day1 to do the very same thing to keep a pot of cookery from being smoked4 ,this sentence may perhaps appear wise and pious to those who have got more houses than one1 or the means of procuring them2 but with respect to the poor man1 who in such a case loses his all1 and must see his family left without a roof over their heads or a bed to lie on1 this decision is as cruel as it is senseless4 ,there is1 however1 a tyranny more dreadful than that which affects only the temporal condition of men4 ,the spiritual despotism1 which burdens and fetters the conscience and enslaves the soul1 is more intolerable still4 ,under temporal losses a man's mind may be supported by a sense of religion2 but when his religion1 by the multiplicity and rigour1 and intricacy of its requirements1 becomes his tormentor1 man is bereft of his last consolation4 ,the religion of the oral law appears to us to be of this character1 and its enactments with regard to the holy days will serve to justify this our opinion4 ,we have seen already1 that it requires two days' cessation from business1 where ,god requires only one1 and that the general rule is1 ,whatsoever is unlawful on the ,sabbath1 is unlawful on the holy day1 with one exception4 ,the ,scribes1 however1 were not content with this1 they have contrived to invent something1 which1 though lawful on the ,sabbath1 is on these days unlawful4 ,they say1 that there is a certain class of things1 which1 if not deliberately destined the day before for the use of the holy day1 are unlawful4 ,to this class they give the name of ,muktzeh1 which literally signifies 8separated or cut off10 but which1 for shortness' sake and for want of a better word in ,english1 we shall call 8undestined40 8,there is on the holy day one thing which is not found on the ,sabbath1 and that is1 the forbidding of the undestined1 for the undestined is unlawful on the holy day1 and is lawful on the ,sabbath4 ,because the holy day is less sacred than the ,sabbath1 they forbade the undestined on that day1 lest persons should be led to make light of it40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov4 c4 i4 #ag47 8,for instance1 a hen that is kept for the purpose of hatching eggs1 and an ox that is kept for ploughing1 pigeons in a pigeon house1 and fruits that are kept for sale1 all these and the like are undestined1 and it is unlawful to eat of them on a holy day1 unless a man destine them on the eve preceding1 and form an intention to eat them40 7,ibid47 ,by this law a numerous class of things is forbidden1 which ,god has no where forbidden1 and fresh chains are forged for the conscience4 ,an unlearned man can hardly tell what does or does not belong to the class1 and if he be in doubt must first go to the rabbi1 before he can eat or make use of any thing doubtful2 for this definition extends not only to eatables1 but to other things1 as for instance1 fuel4 ,suppose1 for example1 that a man or a family had eaten nuts or almonds on the eve of the holy day1 is it lawful or unlawful to burn the shells on the holy day itself8 ,the ,word of ,god leaves the ,jew at perfect liberty to do as he pleases1 but the oral law tells him that he may by doing either commit a great sin4 ,if he cannot resolve his scruples in this matter1 he must be content to go to the rabbi or some learned man1 and submit to his decision1 and thus every unlearned and devout ,jew is brought into complete captivity to the decisions of the learned4 ,another very similar law1 and tending to the same bondage1 is that which makes any thing that is born or comes into existence on the holy day1 unlawful4 4 4 8,and as the undestined is unlawful on the holy day1 so also what is born is unlawful4 ,on a common day a man may destine things for the ,sabbath1 and also for the holy day4 ,but on a holy day things may not be destined for the ,sabbath1 nor on the ,sabbath for the holy day1 therefore an egg that is laid on the holy day after the ,sabbath is unlawful40 7,ibid47 ,now not to speak of the minute trifling of this law1 there are cases where it may become very oppressive4 ,suppose that by some means an unlawful egg should get amongst a number of lawful eggs1 they would all become unlawful4 8,yea1 though it should be mixed up amongst a thousand1 they are all unlawful40 ,it is true that the rabbies endeavour to guard against such on accident1 by forbidding the removal of such an egg on the holy day2 but a ,gentile or a child might1 through inadvertently putting such an egg amongst others1 produce great inconvenience or even loss1 and to this the poor man must submit1 or burden his conscience with a wilful transgression4 ,but this law forbidding to eat or move whatsoever comes into existence on the holy day extends beyond the class of eatables4 ,wood accidentally broken on this day belongs to this class1 and it is therefore unlawful to use it as fuel1 or to move it4 ,in like manner1 ashes of wood that has been burnt on the holy day1 is considered as having come into existence1 and it is a sin to move it1 when once it has cooled4 ,and again1 if a fire should go out on the holy day1 it is a grave question whether the fuel that remains may be kindled again4 ,thus the conscience is burdened with definitions of unlawful1 but the directions about things lawful are quite as numerous and perplexing4 ,for instance1 it is lawful to make a fire on a holy day1 and to put on the pot for cooking1 but an unlearned man or woman may commit a sin in the mode of doing it1 and1 therefore1 the ,baal ,turim says1 1 8,when one makes a fire and puts on a pot1 it is necessary to be very careful in the arranging of the wood1 and the mode of setting the pot upon it1 so that there should be no resemblance to budding1 for ,rav ,judah has said1 every pile of wood begun from the top to the bottom is lawful1 from the bottom to the top is unlawful40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #ejb47 ,for this reason very minute directions are given for the performance of each of these operations4 ,the fire is to be made in the following manner3-- 4 4 8,he that makes a pile of fire on a holy day1 when he is arranging the wood1 is not to lay one piece upon another1 so as to make an orderly arrangement1 for that looks as if he were building2 and although it be an accidental building it is unlawful4 ,but either he is to scatter the wood in confusion1 or to arrange them with some variation4 ,how so8 ,he is to lay one piece at the top1 and another piece under it1 and another under that1 until it reaches the ground40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov4 c4 iv4 #ad47 ,in like manner the pot is not to be placed upon stones1 or whatever else is to support it1 but is to be held up1 and the support placed under it2 and so with other things4 ,the great principle is1 that some difference is to be made between the work done on the holy day and on a common day1 and therefore in the carrying of wine1 or wood1 or other things1 they are not to be carried in a basket1 nor as usual1 but on the shoulder or in some extraordinary way4 ,now1 as the speculations of men who had not much to do1 or who chose to devote the powers that ,god had given them to such minuti1 these things hardly appear as harmless2 but when imposed as a burden upon the consciences of others1 they are utterly unjustifiable1 and if they were found in the ,new ,testament1 they would furnish abundant matter for ,jewish wit and ridicule4 ,they would naturally say1 what1 is this the religion that the ,messiah came to teach8 ,had he nothing better to do than to look after the making of fires1 and the putting on of pots8 ,but this is not the religion of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 nor of his apostles4 ,there is nothing similar in the ,new ,testament4 ,this is the religion1 and these the laws of those who reject him4 ,but this system of minute legislation has another and a worse consequence2 it leads to difficulty1 and the difficulty leads to artifice1 and thus the mind1 instead of being improved and benefited1 is actually corrupted by the practice of this rabbinical religion4 ,thus the oral law says1 that it is unlawful on a holy day to cook food for the following day1 especially to a common day1 but that if any of the food remain it is lawful4 ,what is the consequence8 ,naturally that more food is prepared than is necessary for the holy day because they know that this may be eaten the day after4 ,and this is no imaginary deduction of ours1 it is a case propounded most fully1 and allowed by the rabbies4 4 4 4 8,a woman may fill a pot with meat1 though she wants only one piece4 ,a cook may fill a boiler with water1 though he wants only the least quantity4 ,a woman may fill an oven with bread1 though she want only one loaf1 for when the oven is full1 the bread bakes better4 ,a man may salt a great many pieces of meat at once1 although he require only one piece2 and so with similar things40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov4 c4 i4 #aj47 ,now this is plainly an evasion of what is considered a ,divine command4 ,in like manner the oral law forbids the preparing of food for ,gentiles4 8,it is unlawful to bake or to cook on a holy day1 in order to feed ,gentiles or dogs2 for it is said1 #8,that only may be done for you4' 7,exod xii4 #af47 #8,for you1' and not for ,gentiles4 #8,for you1' and not for dogs40 7,ibid47 ,the principle of this decision may lead to several difficulties3 first1 a ,jew may have ,gentiles in his employ and service whom he boards1 what is he to do then8 ,this difficulty he may get over in the manner just mentioned1 by having more cooked than he wants1 then it is lawful for the ,gentile to eat of the surplus4 ,but suppose a ,gentile and a ,jew had a beast in partnership1 and either wished to have it slaughtered on the holy day1 is it lawful for a ,jew to slaughter it8 ,according to the above decision1 it would appear not1 for it is preparing food to feed a ,gentile2 but the rabbies have found out a reason for evading the command4 8,a beast which partly belongs to a ,gentile and partly to an ,israelite1 may lawfully be slaughtered on a holy day1 for it is impossible to eat the size of an olive of the meat1 if it be not slaughtered by a ,jew40 7,ibid47 ,this1 also1 is nothing more nor less than an evasion4 ,but now suppose that a ,jew finds on a holy day1 and after he has eaten his meals1 that a beast belonging to him is likely to die1 and that therefore he is likely to lose it altogether1 what is he to do8 ,the oral law lays it down that it is unlawful to slaughter for the following day1 and yet if it die without slaughtering1 it must be totally unlawful to eat4 ,in this case there is a saving clause which removes the difficulty4 1 8,he that has a beast near unto death must not slaughter it on a holy day1 unless he knows that he can eat of its flesh the size of an olive1 roasted1 whilst it is still day1 that he may not slaughter on a holy day what is to be eaten on a common day40 7,ibid47 ,here the evasion is palpable4 ,the man has already eaten his meals1 he knows that it is not for the holy day1 that it is simply to save himself from loss1 and yet the oral law obliges him to be guilty of deceit1 and to eat a minute particle of it1 that the appearance may be kept up4 ,if it were intended mercifully to save the poor from loss1 why not make it lawful at once1 without any such condition8 ,here the mercy of the enactment is quite destroyed by the encouragement of deceit4 ,in the same way the oral law forbids open1 straightforward buying and selling on a holy day1 and yet prescribes a method of evasion4 8,a man must not say to a butcher1 ,give me meat for so much money1 only1 ,give a portion1 or half a portion1 and on the morrow they settle the account as to its value40 7,ibid4 c4 iv4 #bj47 8,a man may go to his accustomed shopkeeper1 or shepherd1 or grazier1 and take from him cattle1 fowls1 and whatsoever he pleases2 only he must not mention to him any money1 nor any number40 7,ibid47 ,to take any thing from a shopkeeper by weight or measure is also forbidden1 if it be done openly and honestly1 but allowed if it be done cunningly and deceitfully4 8,and thus a man must not take any thing from a shopkeeper by weight or measure1 only let him say to the shopkeeper1 ,fill this vessel for me2 and on the morrow he gives him the value4 ,and even though the vessel should be one set apart for the purpose of measuring1 he may fill it1 provided that the name of a measure be not mentioned40 7,ibid47 ,in all these cases it is plain that a real transaction of buying and selling takes place1 and on the showing of the rabbies themselves1 contrary to the ,word of ,god4 ,those men who would flog a fellow-creature for not keeping their own commandment of a second holy day1 make no scruple of devising and prescribing a system of fraudulent evasion of ,god's commands4 ,perhaps some may think that we use too strong language when we apply the words cunning and deceit to those devices of the oral law1 but this language was suggested by the oral law itself1 which does not scruple to use similar words1 and to pronounce that1 in similar cases1 cunning or deceit is lawful4 4 8,if a first-born beast and its offspring fall into a pit1 the first is to be helped out on condition of slaughtering it1 but it is not slaughtered4 ,then guile is to be used1 and the second also helped out on condition of slaughtering it1 and then they slaughter which of the two they please4 ,on account of the affliction of the animals1 it has been pronounced lawful to use guile40 7,ibid4 c4 ii47 ,here the oral law speaks plainly1 it fairly says that guile may be used4 ,it is no defence to say1 that this guile was suggested by compassion for the animals4 ,if it be lawful to help the animals out of the pit at all1 it is lawful to do it without any guile1 openly and honestly4 ,and if it be unlawful to help them out1 it is doubly unlawful to do so through guile and deceit1 as if ,god was ignorant of the thoughts and designs of their hearts1 and could be satisfied with false and fictitious conditions4 ,but there is another case1 where this same word is also used1 and where the excuse of compassion is altogether out of the question4 444 4 8,he that takes off the hide of a beast on a holy day1 must not salt it1 for this is work1 and he would be guilty of doing work that is not necessary for the preparation of food4444 ,but it is lawful to salt meat for roasting on the top of the hide1 and in this matter guile is employed4 ,how so8 ,thus4 ,a little meat is salted on one part1 and then a little on another part1 until the whole hide be salted40 7,ibid4 c4 iii4 #d47 ,here no defence whatever can be offered4 ,the oral law confesses that to salt a hide is unlawful1 its compilers therefore set to work to find out a method of doing what was forbidden1 and yet have the appearance of keeping the law1 and they sagaciously discovered the above solution of the difficulty4 ,thus the law of ,god is made null by the traditions of men4 ,the commandments of the ,scribes are enforced by flogging and excommunication1 but full permission given to violate ,god's commands1 if only an appearance of obedience can be preserved4 ,no wonder that ,jesus of ,nazareth1 whose characteristic is mildness and gentleness1 used such harsh language to the authors of this system4 ,his general address to them was1 8,woe unto you1 ,scribes and ,pharisees1 hypocrites40 ,they professed the utmost anxiety to have the law of ,god observed4 ,this was the professed object of their commandments4 ,they were invented as a hedge to keep off every ,israelite from even an approach to transgression2 and they enforced the observance of this defence by the severest punishments4 ,but where the law of ,god interfered with their worldly interest1 their profit or their gain1 they fearlessly made void the law1 and inculcated a system of guile and evasion4 ,and this is perhaps the most deadly element in the ,talmudic potion4 ,the human heart is ever ready to imbibe what is bad1 and the human mind most quick in generalizing the principles of evil4 ,the only efficient remedy for this disease of head and heart is the inculcation of those pure and holy principles1 which ,god has graciously revealed4 ,but when these principles are themselves adulterated1 and a system of guileful evasion taught as the religion of ,moses and the prophets1 what are the results to be expected8 ,the cruel oppression of the poor is bad enough4 ,the enslaving the consciences of the weak is worse2 but the corrupting the minds of the simple by such pernicious doctrines1 is the worst of all4 ,yet this is the work of the ,jewish religion1 as taught in the oral law1 and as recognized in the prayers of the synagogue4 ,we do not mean to say that there is anything peculiar in the system4 ,we know that the ,provincial ,letters develop a ,gentile system as corrupt and corrupting4 ,but that system has nothing to do with the ,christianity of the ,new ,testament4 ,our forefathers renounced it long ago4 ,the ,jews still adhere to the oral law1 and in their prayers and observances still acknowledge its ,divine authority2 and wherever ,judaism exists in vigour1 these are the doctrines instilled into the minds of the young1 and to which the flower of the ,jewish nation devote the vigour of their manhood and the judgment of their old age4 ,that there are ,jews who abhor this system1 and have adopted the purer principles of the ,new ,testament1 even though they do not profess ,christianity1 we well know4 ,but how is it that there are none who have courage to protest against it8 ,how is it that there is not one who comes forward to emancipate his brethren from moral slavery and the galling chain of superstition and error8 8,there is none to guide her among all the sons whom she hath brought forth3 neither is there any that taketh her by the hand of all the sons that she hath brought up40 7,isaiah li4 #ah47 ,no4 ,,xv4 ,,sabbath ,,mixture4 ,in discussing the substance and tendency of the oral law1 the very nature of our design compels us to dwell upon its peculiarities1 and to notice those traits which appear as its essential characteristics4 ,our object is not1 primarily1 to show its defects and fruits1 but to prove that it is not of ,divine authority4 ,in proving this1 it is absolutely necessary to show1 by a comparison with the law and the prophets1 as the unerring standard of right and wrong1 that the system is bad4 ,we know1 and have more than once admitted1 that as it is not a mere human invention1 but a corruption of a divinely revealed religion1 it must contain much that is good4 ,but this admission no more justifies the system1 than a small quantity of gold in a mixed metal would prove that the whole mass is gold4 ,and this comparison may be well illustrated by the holy day constitutions1 which have lately occupied our attention4 ,the concluding paragraph of these constitutions contains several beautiful and pious precepts2 as1 for example1 after the command to rejoice on such days1 and to provide nuts and such-like things for the children1 new clothes and ornaments for the women1 and good eating and drinking for the men1 we read as follows3-- 8,and when he eats and drinks1 he is bound to feed the stranger1 the orphan1 and the widow1 with the other poor4 ,but he that bolts the doors of his house1 and eats and drinks with his children and his wife1 but does not furnish meat and drink to the poor and afflicted1 is not to be regarded as having fulfilled the commandment2 on the contrary1 his joy is that of a glutton1 and of such persons it is said1 #8,their sacrifices shall be unto them as the bread of mourners2 all that eat thereof shall be polluted3 for their bread for their soul shall not come into the house of the ,lord4' 7,hos4 ix4 #d470 7,arbah ,turim1 #ebi47 ,this makes a merciful provision for the poor1 and as teaching all who partake of the good things of this world to remember their poorer brethren1 is worthy of praise and imitation4 ,we know also that this charity is practised by all devout ,jews in every part of the world1 and that they are on this account entitled to the respect of all who can appreciate benevolence4 ,but the reason why every believer in revelation will approve this commandment is1 because it accords with the ,word of ,god4 ,moses has made this precept a part of his law3 8,the stranger1 and the fatherless1 and the widow1 which are within thy gates1 shall come1 and shall eat and be satisfied2 that the ,lord thy ,god may bless thee in all the work of thine hand which thou doest40 7,deut4 xiv4 #bi47 ,and in the ,new ,testament there is found a similar command3 8,when thou makest a dinner or a supper1 call not thy friends1 nor thy brethren1 neither thy kinsmen nor thy rich neighbours2 lest they also bid thee again1 and a recompense be made thee4 ,but when thou makest a feast1 call the poor1 the maimed1 the lame1 the blind2 and thou shalt be blessed2 for they cannot recompense thee2 for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just40 7,luke xiv4 #ab-ad74 ,but excellent as this rabbinical commandment is in itself1 it loses considerably when interpreted according to the system4 ,a person acquainted only with the law of ,moses1 or the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 would say1 that one of the most lovely features in the command is the universal love inculcated towards the stranger as well as the ,israelites4 ,but an acquaintance with the oral law would compel him to retract this commendation1 for there universally the stranger is interpreted to mean1 8a proselyte to ,judaism10 as for instance-- 1 1 8,to love the stranger who comes1 and is gathered under the wings of the ,shechinah1 is to fulfil two affirmative precepts2 one1 because he is included in the number of those considered #8neighbours1' and a second1 because the law says1 #8,ye shall love the stranger4'0 7,hilchoth ,deoth1 c4 vi4 #d47 ,here1 then1 that comprehensive word 8stranger0 is narrowed down to the signification 8religious proselyte10 and abundance of similar passages have already been given in ,nos4 #d and #e4 ,but even with this great drawback we admit that there is much to be commended in the above commandment4 ,we are quite willing to recognize all the good which we can1 and therefore add another passage or two which deserve notice4 4 8,it is a characteristic of the pious1 who set the ,lord always before them1 and in all their ways acknowledge him1 that in the time of their joy they multiply still more the blessings and praises of the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 who makes them to rejoice4 ,at such a season1 too1 a man ought to think1 if such be the joy of this world1 which is vanity1 for it is followed by sorrow and trouble1 what will be the joy of the world to come1 which is everlasting1 and to which no sorrow can succeed40 7,arbah ,turim1 ibid47 ,this passage also1 as resting upon the unsophisticated ,word of ,god1 must receive unqualified assent4 ,the character of the pious is here beautifully described by the union of two passages of ,scripture4 ,they are those 8who set the ,lord always before them10 7,ps4 xvi4 #h17 and who 8in all their ways acknowledge him40 7,prov4 iii4 #f47 ,god grant that all1 both ,jews and ,christians1 may earnestly endeavour to realize this character4 ,the piety of this passage is equalled by the prudence of one of their police regulations for the three great feasts4 8,the tribunal is bound1 at the three feasts1 to appoint officers for the purpose of going about and inspecting gardens1 and parks1 and rivers1 that men and women may not congregate in such places to eat and drink1 and be led to commit sin40 ,if the authors of the oral law had confined themselves to such commandments as these1 there would be but little to blame4 ,but unfortunately the good and useful precepts bear but a small proportion to the whole1 and are often directly counteracted by the peculiar principles of the system4 ,the above general description of piety is unexceptionable1 but the detail of the requirements1 even for the holy day alone1 is such as must effectually pervert and distort the features there delineated4 ,how can a man have a just idea of setting the ,lord always before him1 who thinks that a cunning evasion of ,god's commandments is permitted1 as was shown in the last number8 ,or how can a man be said to acknowledge ,god1 when his mind is filled and occupied with the manifold and perplexing ceremonies of man's institution8 ,of these inventions many have already been given1 but more remain1 and the ,jewish ,prayer-book for the passover especially reminds us of one4 8,the laws of the mixture for the cooking of victuals40 ,this oral law has made it unlawful on the holy day to prepare food for the ,sabbath4 8,when a holy day falls on the eve of the ,sabbath1 it is unlawful to bake or to cook on that day what is to be eaten on the morrow1 i4e4 on the ,sabbath40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov4 c4 vi4 #a47 ,this law may of course create a great inconvenience1 for if nothing remains after the meals of the holy day1 there will be no food for the ,sabbath1 and on that day the law of ,moses forbids all cooking4 ,and1 strange to say1 the evasion which is allowed at other times is here forbidden4 ,a man is not permitted to cook a surplus of victuals under the pretence that it is for the holy day4 ,another and more solemn mode of evasion has been invented1 and is thus prescribed in the ,jewish ,prayer-book-- 4 4 4 ,of which ,d4 ,levi gives the following translation1 which though not very literal1 is preferable to a new one1 as occurring in an authorized edition of the ,jewish prayers3-- 8,if the first day of the festival happens on the ,thursday1 the following ceremony is observed4 ,on the day preceding the festival1 the master of every family takes a whole cake and a piece of meat1 fish1 or a roasted egg2 and having delivered them to one standing by1 to denote that all the other ,jews in the city that may have forgotten to make the mixture shall1 nevertheless1 have the benefit of the said mixture1 so as to be able to prepare on the festival what is necessary for the ,sabbath1 he then says the following3-- 4 8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord1 our ,god6 ,king of the universe1 who has sanctified us with thy commandments1 and commanded us concerning the mixture40 8,by this mixture it shall be allowable for us to bake1 boil1 and to keep the victuals warm3 to light up lights1 and to do1 and prepare all things necessary1 on the festival for the ,sabbath2 we1 and all ,israel that dwell in this city40 7,levi's ,prayers1 vol4 v4 pp4 #d1 #e47 ,now1 against this ceremony several and serious objections may be made4 ,first1 if it be absolutely unlawful on the holy day to cook for the ,sabbath-day1 how is the unlawfulness removed1 by going through a trifling ceremony1 and repeating a few words8 ,the cooking is1 in the sight of ,god1 either lawful or unlawful4 ,if lawful1 then this ceremony is utterly useless1 and the solemn calling upon ,god is only a solemn profanation4 ,if unlawful1 then nothing but a dispensation from ,israel's great lawgiver1 ,god himself1 can make it lawful4 ,any thing short of this must1 by every honest man1 be regarded either as an evasion1 or a bold and wilful transgression4 ,secondly1 the unlawfulness on which this ceremony is founded1 is altogether of man's making--,god has nowhere forbidden the ,jews to prepare for ,sabbath on the holy day4 ,the ,scribes have here as elsewhere dared to add to the law of ,god4 4 8,this prohibition is of the words of the ,scribes1 that a man may not be led to prepare on a holy day for a common day4 ,for if he feel it unlawful to cook for ,sabbath1 still more will he feel this for a common day40 7,hilchoth ,jom4 ,tov4 vi4 #a47 ,here it is plainly confessed that the prohibition is not from ,god but from man4 ,a reason is assigned for this addition1 which is unsatisfactory1 and shows that the ,scribes thought the law imperfect1 and themselves wiser than ,god4 ,they were afraid1 if men got into a habit of cooking on the holy day for the following day1 when that day was the ,sabbath1 they might get into the habit of cooking generally for the following day1 and thus cook for common days4 ,but did not ,god foresee this possibility1 and know the frailty of human nature just as well as the rabbies8 why then did he not take this precaution himself8 ,if this precaution be absolutely necessary1 as it was not given by ,god1 it will necessarily follow that ,god did not give that which was necessary1 and therefore that the law of ,god was imperfect until it was mended by the rabbies4 ,if the law1 as given by ,god1 be perfect1 and who can deny it without blasphemy1 then this precaution of the rabbies is useless1 and they are proved guilty of making additions to the law of ,god1 and of imposing needless burdens on the consciences of their brethren4 ,if this ceremony were left to the free will of every individual1 it would be very different1 but it is imposed as an indispensable duty1 and a man pronounced a sinner if he does not comply4 8,he who can make the mixture1 and does not1 but chooses to depend on the mixture made by the great men of the city1 is called a sinner1 and has not fulfilled his duty40 7,arbah ,turim1 #ebg47 ,here then his conscience is burdened1 but further1 he may be exposed to considerable inconvenience1 to escape from which he is driven again to a prescribed exercise of artifice and guile4 4 4 8,he that has not performed the ceremony of the mixture for himself1 and for whom others have not done it1 as it is unlawful for him to boil or to bake1 so his flour and food are unlawful2 and it is unlawful for another1 who has performed the ceremony for himself1 to boil and bake for such an one until he buy for himself4 ,then he may boil and bake of his own1 for he has bought it1 and if he please may make a present of it to the other40 ,here of course the purchase is fictitious4 ,in like manner it is unlawful for him to light the ,sabbath candle4 ,this would be a great misfortune1 and a learned rabbi has accordingly found out a remedy of the same kind4 8,rabbi ,meyer1 of ,rothenburg1 has said in his writings1 that a man may seek for something in the room by the light of a candle1 yea though it be still day1 and then leave it lighting until night40 7,arbah ,turim1 #ebg47 ,we ask the ,jews seriously to consider this specimen of rabbinical wisdom and conscientiousness4 ,a man who has not performed the ceremony of the mixture dare not do what ,god has allowed him to do1 he dare not light the candle for ,sabbath1 that is1 if he does it honestly and openly1 he would1 according to the oral law1 commit a sin4 ,but then he may do this same thing by using guile and deceit1 which ,god has forbidden1 and then according to these same teachers1 the act is lawful4 ,he may light a candle under pretence of searching for something1 even though he has the daylight1 and therefore evidently does not want it for that purpose1 and then he can leave it lighting4 ,thus the oral law teaches that the neglect of a mere human invention is a greater sin than guile and deceit4 ,is not this to strain at a gnat and to swallow a camel8 ,but some ,rabbinist may say1 if the oral law encourages guile and deceit1 why does it forbid the employment or guile in the preparation of food for the ,sabbath1 as has been stated above8 ,this is a curious point1 and deserves attention4 ,the oral law says1 if food be left after the meals of the holy day1 it is lawful to eat it on the ,sabbath1 provided that no guile be used2 but if guile be used1 it is unlawful4 ,whereas1 if a man wilfully neglect the ceremony of the mixture1 and cook notwithstanding for the ,sabbath he may lawfully eat what he has prepared4 ,this has at first sight1 the appearance of wishing to discourage guile1 but the reasons1 given for this decision1 show that this is far from being the case4 4 8,what is the reason that they were more severe upon him that used guile than upon the wilful transgressor1 and made it unlawful for the former1 but not for the latter8 ,the reason is this1 if they had pronounced it lawful for him that uses guile1 all would use guile1 and the very name of mixture for food would perish4 ,on the other hand1 a wilful transgressor is rare1 and if he transgresses to-day1 he will not transgress again40 ,the employment of guile1 then1 is not forbidden because it is odious in the sight of ,god and man1 but simply from the fear that it might operate prejudicially upon the observance of a rabbinic command4 ,such is and must be the effect of multiplying religious ceremonies1 and imposing them upon the conscience as necessary to salvation4 ,the conscience becomes burdened1 and beset with difficulties1 and is glad of any refuge or relief1 even though it should be derived from artifice and deceit4 ,artifice is at last made lawful1 or even prescribed1 as we have seen in many instances1 and then religion1 which ,god intended as a remedy for our moral disease1 becomes itself a new source of infection4 ,but if any burdened conscience should awake and become sensible of the cheat that has been put upon it by the oral law1 the probability is that it will cast off religion altogether1 and mistake ,moses too for a companion or the ,scribes and ,pharisees2 and thus many a rabbinical ,jew has been led to utter infidelity4 ,but there is still a third objection to be urged against this ceremony of the mixture1 and that is1 that it prescribes a form of thanksgiving to ,god for appointing that which he never appointed3 8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord our ,god6 ,king of the universe6 who has sanctified us with thy commandments1 and commanded us concerning the mixture40 ,where has ,god commanded the mixture8 ,where1 from one end of the law to the other1 or in the prophets1 is there one word about this ceremony8 ,it is from first to last a pure invention of the ,scribes4 ,god never appointed it4 ,this prayer1 then1 contains a positive untruth1 and thus the ignorant and unlearned are deceived1 and taught even in the solemn act of public worship to believe that ,god has commanded what he never commanded4 ,the minds of children1 too1 are thus imbued with the commandments of men1 and taught in the language of prayer to stamp the divine authority upon the invention of the ,scribes and ,pharisees4 ,and this is done not only in the forests of ,poland1 or on the uncivilized coasts of ,barbary1 but here in ,england4 ,this ceremony and this prayer are prescribed in the two editions of the ,jewish prayer-book1 published by ,levi and ,alexander4 ,in this country1 where full liberty of conscience prevails1 the language of the synagogue is just the same as in the darkest and most oppressed regions of the habitable globe4 ,the ,jewish children are still taught to bless ,god for giving what he never gave1 and the sacred voice of prayer still consecrates the intolerance1 the errors1 and the absurdities of the oral law4 ,in other countries1 where the circumstances were not so favourable1 the ,jews have made more than one attempt to renounce and repudiate the errors of the ,talmud4 ,but in ,england1 whether from listlessness or from a love to these ,talmudic doctrines1 we do not presume to say1 nothing has been done either by the ,german or the ,portuguese ,jews4 ,in ,england the ,talmud still maintains its empire of error and uncharitableness1 and spiritual tyranny1 and not one individual has dared publicly to protest against it4 ,we ask the ,jews seriously to consider this matter1 and to compare the extracts which we give with ,moses and the prophets2 if the oral law agrees with that which is confessedly the ,word of ,god1 then we beg of them to explain the lawfulness of using guile1 of inventing new commandments1 and enforcing them with the severest punishments4 ,but if they decide that these things are altogether forbidden by ,god1 then we call upon them to protest aloud against these adulterations of revealed truth4 ,no4 ,,xvi4#ag ,,intolerance ,,of ,,rabbinic ,,prayers4 ,in our last number we ventured to say1 that in the ,english synagogues 8,the sacred voice of prayer still consecrates the intolerance1 the errors1 and the absurdities of the oral law20 and we gave an instance in proof of our assertion4 ,but to some ,israelites1 who have overlooked the contents of their ,prayer-book1 this assertion may require more proof2 we therefore1 proceed to give it1 and first of all with regard to intolerance4 ,in the ceremonial for the first two evenings of the ,passover1 in the midst of the rejoicings and thanksgivings1 which the memory of their great deliverance naturally calls forth1 we suddenly find the following prayer3-- 4 4 4 8,pour out thy wrath upon the heathen that have not known thee1 and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon thy name4 ,for they have devoured ,jacob1 and laid waste his dwelling place4 7,psalm lxxix4 #f1 #g47 ,pour out thine indignation upon them1 and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them4 7,psalm lxix4 #bd47 ,persecute them in anger1 and destroy them from under the heavens of the ,lord40 7,lament4 iii4 #ff47 ,here are three passages of ,scripture1 taken from their context1 and joined together to make one prayer4 ,in their context1 and with reference to the times for which those portions of ,scripture were given by ,god1 they are intelligible4 ,after the destruction of ,jerusalem by the ,romans1 whilst the ,jewish mind was still in a state of violent excitement against the authors of that calamity1 such on imprecation may appear natural4 ,during the persecutions of the ,crusaders or the ,inquisition it might be excusable1 but in the present time and circumstances it is indefensible4 ,who are the heathen and the kingdoms1 whom the offerers of these petitions wish to be pursued with ,god's wrath1 and to be destroyed from under the heavens8 ,are they the ,christians1 or the heathen idolaters of ,africa and ,india8 ,the ,mahometans profess a faith in the ,unity very similar to that of the later rabbies3 they1 therefore1 cannot be intended4 ,if it be said that the idolatrous heathen are here intended1 we must still protest against the intolerance of this imprecation2 why should the ,jews wish for their destruction8 ,what evil did these poor ignorant people ever do to the ,jews in ,england1 that they should pray for their destruction rather than their conversion8 ,if it be said1 that nobody at all is intended in the present day1 why1 we would ask1 is it still made a part of the ,passover ceremonial8 ,we have before us several copies of the ,haggadah1 some printed very lately1 and it occurs in them all4 ,if this were the only passage of the kind to be found in the liturgies of the synagogue1 it might perhaps admit of palliation or excuse1 but it is only one of a similar class1 all breathing the same spirit4 ,in the morning service for the second day of the ,passover1 as translated by ,d4 ,levi1 we find another more fearful still4 1 1 1 1 1 8,hasten1 ,o my beloved1 to where thy heart and eyes are2 and though we have cast off that that is good and pleasant1 yet hear the roaring raging voice of those that oppress thy people2 satiate the clods with their blood2 manure the earth with their fat2 and let the stench of their carcasses ascend40 7,levi's ,prayers1 vol4 #e1 fol4 #adb47 ,the translation is ,d4 ,levi's1 so that it cannot be said1 that the sense has been misrepresented or distorted for polemical purposes4 ,it is the translation of a ,jew1 and of a ,jew in ,england1 and the title-page tells us that it is the second edition 8carefully revised and corrected1 and illustrated by ,isaac ,levi40 ,the title-page also says1 8,as read in their synagogues and used in their families40 ,is not this prayer intolerant8 ,is there any thing like it in the ,new ,testament1 or in our ,christian ,prayer-books8 ,and yet we are told that modern ,judaism is more tolerant than ,christianity1 and that it teaches charity to all men4 ,let not the ,jews think that we impute this spirit to the whole nation4 ,no such thing4 ,this passage is quoted as a specimen of the spirit of the oral law and its authors1 who not only were possessed of this spirit of resentment1 but so overwhelmed with it1 as to transfuse it into their addresses to the ,god of mercy1 and to prescribe it as a port of the public worship of the congregation4 ,whenever introduced1 there it still remains1 as a testimony to the spirit of the first opposers of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and as a portion of the liturgic service of the synagogue4 ,in these passages1 however1 it does not appear what nations are intended2 no name or particular characteristic is given1 though the allusion1 in the last quoted prayer1 to ,isaiah xxxiv41 naturally leads the reader to think of ,edom2 but in other places a more definite form is prescribed1 from which we find that ,edom is the great object of hatred4 1 1 8,god divideth the night of preservation1 when in the midst of the night he went forth through the land of ,egypt3 may the mighty ,god also divide it concerning ,edom40 7,levi1 ibid4 fol4 #g47 ,this is a petition that ,god would do to ,edom as he did unto ,egypt4 ,again1 a little further on we read1 1 1 8,on the ,passover1 a sharp sword shall fall on ,edom1 by the hand of him who is white and ruddy1 as in the days of the feast of ,passover40 7,ibid4 fol4 #aj47 ,and so throughout the prayers there are frequent allusions to this subject1 as for instance-- 1 1 1 1 1 8,then will his name be pronounced as it is written3 when the other half will complete the word2 his dominion also will be greatly exalted1 and his throne be completely established2 when he shall smite the descendants of ,esau1 and take vengeance on his enemies40 7,ibid4 fol4 #bad47 ,but these are sufficient to show that ,edom is the great object of antipathy1 and of course the great question is1 whom do the ,jews understand by ,edom8 ,let the most famous of their rabbies instruct us in this matter1 and first let us hear ,maimonides3-- 8,the ,edomites are idolaters1 and the first day of the week is the day of their festival2 therefore it is forbidden to have commerce with them in the land of ,israel1 on the fifth and sixth day of every week4 ,it is not necessary to say that the first day itself is every where unlawful40 7,hilchoth ,accum4 c4 ix4 #d47 ,there is but one class of religionists who observe the first day of the week as sacred4 ,now let us hear ,kimchi4 ,in his commentary on ,joel iii4 #ai1 8,egypt shall be a desolation1 and ,edom shall be a desolate wilderness1 for the violence against the children of ,judah1 because they have shed innocent blood in their land30 he says1 1 444 8,the prophet mentions ,egypt and ,edom3 ,egypt1 on account of the ,turks1 and ,edom1 on account of the ,roman empire2 and these two have now had dominion for a long time1 and will continue until the redemption4 ,this is the fourth beast in the visions of ,daniel4444 ,and this is said1 because the majority of the ,roman empire is composed of ,edomites4 ,for although many other nations are mixed among them1 as is also the case with the ,turkish empire1 they are called after the root40 ,kimchi then fixes ,edom upon the ,roman empire1 in which he evidently includes the ,greek empire1 for he wrote in the #abth century1 long before the ,constantinopolitan dynasty was overturned4 ,aben ,esra gives a similar interpretation on the blessing of ,esau4 1 8,rome1 which led us away captive1 is of the seed of ,kittim1 and so the ,targumist has said1 in ,numbers xxiv4 #bd1 #8,and ships shall come from the coast of ,kittim4' ,and this is the same as the ,greek monarchy1 as ,i have explained in the book of ,daniel2 and there were very few who believed on the man of whom they made a god4 ,but when ,rome believed in the days of ,constantine1 who changed the whole religion1 and put an image of that man upon his standard1 there were none in the world who observed the new law except a few ,edomites1 therefore ,rome is called the kingdom of ,edom40 7,comment4 on ,gen4 xxix47 ,we do not now stop to refute the false statements which ,aben ,ezra here makes4 ,every one that knows anything of history1 knows that in less than a century after the time of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 the ,christian religion had made great progress in the whole ,roman empire1 and that the propagation of the new law1 as ,aben ,ezra calls it1 before the time of ,constantine1 was more rapid and more extensive than after his conversion4 ,our business at present is with his interpretation of the word ,edom2 he says plainly that ,edom and ,edomites mean the ,christians4 ,now let us hear ,abarbanel3-- 8,from this you may learn that the prophet 7,obadiah7 did not prophesy only against the land of ,edom1 which is in the neighbourhood of the land of ,israel1 but also against that people which branches off from thence1 and is spread through the whole world1 and that is the people of the ,christians in this our day1 for they are of the children of ,edom40 7,comment4 on ,obadiah47 ,here1 then1 we have ,maimonides1 ,kimchi1 ,aben ,ezra1 and ,abarbanel1 all giving the same interpretation1 and all asserting that ,edom means the ,christians4 ,according to this interpretation1 then1 the above dreadful imprecations are for the destruction of the ,christians4 ,is this tolerant or charitable8 ,is this in accordance with ,moses' account of the ,divine character--8,merciful and gracious1 long-suffering1 and abundant in goodness and truth80 ,are these the petitions that poor sinful creatures ought to offer when they assemble for the worship of the ,creator of all flesh8 ,above all1 are they suitable in an ,english synagogue1 and in the present day8 ,you may say that ,kimchi and those other commentators1 lived in the times of ,popery1 and that ,edom only means the ,roman ,catholic ,christians4 ,but what will those ,jews say who live in ,rome itself1 and ,france1 and ,bavaria1 and other ,roman ,catholic countries8 ,you may think them in error1 so do we1 but we cannot for that pray that ,god 8would satiate the clods with their blood1 manure the earth with their fat1 and cause the stench of their carcases to ascend40 ,we could not utter such an imprecation against the cannibals of ,new ,zealand1 nor the man-stealers of ,africa4 ,but if you say that you do not offer up these petitions against the ,christians1 whether ,protestant or ,romanist1 may we ask against whom then are they directed8 ,and what are your thoughts when you hear these petitions read1 and join in them in the synagogue8 ,the literal ,edom was destroyed long since2 the children of ,edom have long since been utterly lost4 ,where are their posterity now to be found8 ,the above-named rabbies say the ,romans were descended from ,edom1 but where is their proof1 either from the ,bible or from profane history8 ,but suppose it was so1 how will that prove that the ,greeks1 the ,french1 the ,germans1 or the inhabitants of the ,british isles are thus descended8 ,the truth is1 there is no historical evidence whatever to give even a colour to this assertion respecting ,rome4 ,the rabbies found dreadful denunciations of wrath against ,edom in the prophets1 particularly in ,obadiah and the thirty-fourth of ,isaiah1 and they thought that ,rome and the ,christians deserved such punishment more than any one else2 they therefore applied them to these objects of their antipathy4 ,as far as authentic history will carry us1 the descendants of the ,edomites are to be sought for rather amongst the ,jews themselves1 than amongst any other people2 for the last that we read of the ,edomites is1 that they were subdued by ,john ,hyrcanus1 and converted to ,judaism at the point of the sword4#ah ,amongst the ,jews1 then1 their descendants have ever since continued1 and strange enough some of them may now be offering in the synagogue these imprecations against themselves4 ,but1 however that be1 the prophecies against ,edom do certainly not apply to the ,christian religion1 which was not ,edomitical1 but altogether ,jewish in its origin4 ,jesus of ,nazareth was a ,jew1 and his apostles and first disciples from a province of ,judea as remote as possible from ,edom4 ,and even if the rabbies could prove that ,rome is ,edom1 still this will have nothing to do with the other nations who are no wise descended from1 or connected with that city or people4 ,we are not ignorant of the many prophecies against ,edom1 but1 however many or severe1 they form no justification of these prayers1 even if the rabbies know who is intended4 ,god is a merciful ,god1 as well as a just ,judge1 and when he arises to judgment1 or when he utters a denunciation of wrath1 we may be sure that he does all in truth and righteousness4 ,but that furnishes no excuse for the sons of men who presumptuously take upon themselves to call down ,god's wrath by prayer1 or to offer themselves as the executioners of his anger4 ,the ,word of ,god contains many denunciations of wrath against the ,jews1 but this does not justify the nations who have persecuted and oppressed them4 ,what would the ,jews think of us if we collected all the fearful passages in the twenty-sixth chapter of ,leviticus1 and the twenty-eight of ,deuteronomy1 and wove them into a prayer to call down ,god's wrath upon the people of ,israel8 ,what would they say if we appointed this form for the most solemn days1 and for the time of our festivity8 ,yet this is what the rabbies have done1 and what the oral law prescribes1 and therefore we say1 that such teaching is not from ,god4 ,and we say this1 not simply because reason leads to this conclusion1 but because such prayers are directly contrary to the express command of ,god4 ,when he sent the ,jews into captivity to ,babylon1 he did not tell them to pray that 8he might pour out his wrath0 upon that city1 and much less to 8satiate the clods with the blood0 of its inhabitants4 ,on the contrary1 he said-- 8,and seek the peace of the city whither ,i have caused you to be carried away captives1 and pray unto the ,lord for it3 for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace40 7,jerem4 xxix4 #g47 ,now how does this command agree with the above prayers8 ,suppose even that the rabbies were right1 and that ,edom does mean ,rome1 how can the ,jews there pray for its peace and for its utter destruction at the same time8 ,those prayers are utterly irreconcilable with this command of ,god1 and therefore furnish another proof of the error as well as the intolerance of the oral law4 ,this was the object which we had peculiarly in view4 ,we do not wish to burden every ,israelite in ,london with this intolerance4 ,many are perhaps ignorant that such prayers are offered in the synagogue--many overlook them through inattention1 and many others disapprove of them4 ,but in those who do know and disapprove1 it is exceedingly inconsistent to join in them1 or to remain silent4 ,the spirit of these prayers is thus countenanced1 and the intolerance handed down from generation to generation4 ,children go to the synagogue1 and hear these prayers offered2 they think as it is the language of prayer1 of public prayer1 of the prayers of the people of ,israel1 it must be right4 ,what other conclusion can they form8 ,thus they imbibe the same spirit1 and thus the people of ,israel are kept in bondage to the intolerance of by-gone generations4 ,but some will say1 ,we acknowledge that these prayers are contrary to the ,bible4 ,remember1 then1 that in making this acknowledgment1 you admit the synagogue--yea1 the whole nation of ,jews1 has been in error for many centuries4 ,and if the ,jewish nation has been universally mistaken upon so simple1 yet essential1 a point of religion as true charity1 it is highly probable that they are mistaken on other points too1 especially those that are more difficult and less obvious to human reason4 ,but above all1 remember that whilst the whole system of the oral law1 in its precepts and prayers1 has taught you to curse your enemies1 ,jesus of ,nazareth has taught us to bless4 8,ye have heard that it hath been said1 ,thou shalt love thy neighbour1 and hate thine enemy3 but ,i say unto you1 ,love your enemies1 bless them that curse you1 do good to them that hate you1 and pray for them which despitefully use you1 and persecute you40 7,matt4 v4 #dc1 #dd47 8,bless them which persecute you3 bless1 and curse not40 7,rom4 xii4 #ad47 ,but some ,israelites may still think that it is unfair to judge the oral law by this one service to the ,passover4 ,such an one we would remind of the blessing of the ,epicureans1 as it is called1 which he is bound to say-- 8in every prayer1 every day40 7,hilchoth ,t'phillah1 c4 ii4 #b47 4 8,o let the slanderers have no hope3 all the wicked be annihilated speedily1 and all the tyrants be cut off quickly2 humble thou them quickly in our days4 ,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord1 who destroyed our enemies40 7,daily ,prayers1 fol4 #cf47 ,here is the same utter want of mercy4 ,no desire for their amendment1 no prayer for their conversion1 but an invocation of sudden wrath and destruction4 ,and this the synagogue prescribes1 not on its feasts only1 but every day2 yea1 and every time of prayer is to be marked by the voice of malediction4 ,there is also another command relating to this daily malediction1 which illustrates still farther the spirit of the oral law4 4 8,if the reader in the synagogue should make a mistake1 or be confused and not know where to begin1 and delay for an hour1 then let another rise up in his stead4 ,but if he made the mistake with regard to the blessing of the ,epicureans1 he is not to be waited for1 but let another instantly rise up in his stead1 for perhaps he is infected with ,epicureanism40 7,ibid4 c4 x4 #c47 ,according to this law1 if the reader go wrong in invoking a blessing1 or offering up an intercessory prayer for mercy1 such a petition may be delayed for a whole hour4 ,but if this malediction should be the place of his mistake1 there is to be no delay and no postponement4 ,if the reader cannot offer it in time1 another is to rise up immediately1 and cry to heaven for a curse4 ,footnote #ag3 ,the ,british ,jews of ,burton-street ,synagogue have expunged from their prayers the intolerance here complained of4 ,footnote #ah3 ,see ,jost's ,geschichte1 vol4 i4 #gj and #aec4 ,no4 ,,xvii4 ,,rabbinic ,,legends ,,in ,,the ,,synagogue ,,services4 ,we have just considered the extraordinary command of the oral law1 which provides1 that1 if the reader in the synagogue should make a mistake in reading the prayers1 the congregation shall wait for him for an hour3 except the mistake occur in cursing the ,epicureans1 for then1 8,he is not be waited for1 but let another instantly rise up in his stead1 for he is1 perhaps1 infected with ,epicureanism40 ,the special notice of this case is as honourable to the ,jews as it is condemnatory of the oral law4 ,it would appear from this that such mistakes had occurred4 ,readers in the synagogues have sometimes stumbled and stammered when thy came to this fearful malediction4 ,and truly we are not surprised1 if a man of piety1 acquainted with ,god's ,word1 should be overwhelmed in publicly cursing his fellow-men1 and be unable to bring the words of imprecation over his lips4 ,the care which the ,scribes took to legislate for such an occurrence1 implies an honourable testimony to the good feeling of the nation1 though it strongly marks their own intolerance1 and forms a striking contrast to the spirit inculcated in the teaching of ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,when his disciples asked him to teach them to pray1 he taught them a short form2 but short as it was1 it contained the petition1 8,forgive us our trespasses1 as we forgive them that trespass against us10 and was followed by this admonition1 8,for if ye forgive men their trespasses1 your heavenly ,father will also forgive you4 ,but if ye forgive not men their trespasses1 neither will your ,father forgive your trespasses40 7,matt4 vi4 #ad1 #ae47 ,the intolerance which we have noticed1 proves sufficiently that the religious ideas of the oral law have not been drawn from ,moses and the prophets2 and this will appear still further from the absurd legends which are alluded to in the prayers of the synagogue1 as if they were acknowledged verities4 ,in the ,liturgy for the feast of ,pentecost1 which is now approaching1 we find more than one such allusion1 to which we would most earnestly call your attention4 ,and first of all1 those prayers recognise the legend of ,leviathan and ,behemoth4 ,in the morning service for that day the ,jews repeat the following words3-- 4 1 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 ,which ,d4 ,levi thus translates3--8,he will certainly bestow on us the portion which he hath promised us of old4 ,the sporting of ,leviathan with the ox of the high mountains1#ai when they shall approach each other and engage in battle4 ,with his horn he thrusts at the mightiest beasts1 but the ,leviathan will leap towards him with his fins and great strength4 ,his ,creator will then approach him with his great sword1 and will prepare him for an entertainment 7or a banquet7 for the righteous2 who will be seated at a table formed of jasper and carbuncle1 with a river of balm flowing before them4 ,when they will delight themselves and be satiated with the bowls of wine prepared at the creation1 and reserved in the wine-press40 ,in this portion of the ,liturgy of the synagogue1 there is a very plain reference to the battle between ,behemoth and ,leviathan4 ,the felicity of the righteous in the world to come is also described1 and a part of it is said to consist of the banquet which ,god will prepare for them from the flesh of ,leviathan1 when he shall have killed him4 ,it is true that ,d4 ,levi has the following note on this banquet3 8,all this is to be understood in a figurative sense1 and by no means literally1 as several ,christian commentators have done1 and thus cast undeserved reproach on the ,rabbinical writers40 ,but he has neither given us his authority1 nor his reasons for this assertion2 nor has he explained the meaning of the figure4 ,we should be glad to know what ninety-nine out of every hundred ,jews understand when they hear this read in the synagogue4 ,what do they understand by the name ,behemoth8 ,what by ,leviathan8 ,what by ,god's killing him8 ,what by preparing him as a banquet for the righteous8 ,but however ,jews in the present day may explain it away1 there can be little doubt how the authors of this hymn and the ,jews of old understood it4 ,in the ,talmud we have the following account of these two great beasts3-- 4 4 4 8,r4 ,judah said1 ,rav said1 ,everything that ,god created in this world he created male and female4 ,and thus he did with ,leviathan the piercing serpent1 and ,leviathan the crooked serpent1 he created them male and female4 ,but if they had been united1 they would have desolated the entire world4 ,what1 then1 did the ,holy ,one do8 ,he took away the strength of the male ,leviathan1 and slew the female and salted her for the righteous for the time to come1 for it is said1 #8,and he shall slay the whale 7or dragon7 that is in the sea4' 7,isaiah xxvii4 #a47 ,in like manner with regard to ,behemoth upon a thousand mountains1 he created them male and female1 but if they had been united they would have desolated the entire world4 ,what then did the ,holy ,one do8 ,he took away the strength of the male ,behemoth1 and made the female barren1 and preserved her for the righteous for the time to come40--7,bava ,bathra1 fol4 #gd1 col4 #b47 ,in this narrative there are no marks of allegory4 ,the creation of the world is not an allegory1 but a fact4 ,the creating of living creatures male and female is another fact4 ,the weakening of the male and the salting of the female to prevent the desolation of the world1 does not look like a figure4 ,the ,jewish commentators certainly take the matter very seriously1 and speak of the creation of ,leviathan1 not as of an allegory1 but as of a real occurrence4 ,thus ,r4 ,moses1 the son of ,nachman1 in his commentary on the words1 8,and ,god made great whales10 after describing the great size1 adds1-- 4 8,and our rabbies have said that #8the great whales' mean ,leviathan and his mate1 for ,god created them male and female1 but slew the female1 and salted her for the righteous for the time to come3 and perhaps this is the reason why the words1 #8,and it was so1' are not added1 for they 7the race of ,leviathan7 did not continue40 7,com4 in ,gen4 i4 #ba47 ,from this it is evident that the famous rabbi knew nothing of an allegory1 for he makes this legend the reason why certain words used after the other works of creation are not here applied4 ,in like manner ,abarbanel speaks of this same pair of living creatures as real1 and as possibly belonging to the class of great whales4 4 4 4 8,but if the ,scripture class creeping things and fish together1 then this verse tells us that ,god created various species1 for some of them are great whales1 as is said in the #eth chapter of ,bava ,bathra1 #8,rabbah ,bar ,bar ,channa says1 ,once upon a time we were sailing in a ship1 and we saw that fish upon whose back the sand remains and rushes grow2 we thought it was terra firma1 and landed1 and remained there and cooked4 ,but when the fish's back grew warm1 he turned round1 and if the ship had not been at hand we must have been drowned4' ,they that go down to the sea in ships in the present time tell similar stories3 and perhaps the ,leviathan and his mate1 mentioned by our rabbies1 belonged to this species4 ,however1 the philosophers of the children of our people attribute to this chapter matter deeper than philosophy1 but which we do not want in this place40 7,com4 in ,gen4 i4 #ba47 ,it is true that ,abarbanel here distinctly admits the existence of mysteries in that chapter of the ,talmud4 ,but it is equally plain1 that he considered the ,leviathan1 mentioned by the rabbies1 not as an allegory1 but a real creation2 and therefore assigned it to the same class as the wonderful fish seen by ,bar ,bar ,channa1 unless we take his words as a sly insinuation1 that the story of ,leviathan is about as true as that narrated by the veracious rabbi4 ,these two great rabbies1 then1 did not take the legend of ,leviathan figuratively2 and we might add some other similar testimonies1 but that ,behemoth also claims a share of our attention1 and an inquiry into his nature will contribute evidence to the same effect1 that this legend was not taken figuratively but literally4 ,in the first place1 ,d4 ,levi himself refers us to ,job xl4 #ae1 and there we read1 8,behold now ,behemoth1 which ,i made with thee2 he eateth grass like an ox40 ,here there certainly is no allegory4 ,the words speak of a living creature1 and so they are interpreted by all the ,jewish commentators1 whom we have an opportunity of consulting4 ,ralbag says-- 8,behemoth is an animal1 that is his name40 7,com4 in loc47 ,aben ,esra1 on the words1 8,behold now ,behemoth1 which ,i made with thee10 says-- 8,behemoth is the name of a great beast4 ,in the habitable world there is not a greater than it4 ,the reason why the words #8with thee' are added1 is1 that it is a land animal1 and at the end he mentions ,leviathan1 which is an animal of the sea4 ,but some say the meaning of #8with thee' is1 that the beasts were created on the same day with the first ,adam2 but this interpretation is after the manner of a drash40 7,aben ,esra in loc47 ,this passage not only gives ,aben ,esra's opinion as to the real existence of ,behemoth1 but shows that other commentators1 to whom he alludes1 were of the same mind4 ,rashi not only asserts the existence1 but says plainly1 1 8,behemoth1 that is prepared for the time to come40 ,and again1 in his commentary on ,psalm l4 #aj1 he takes the words 1 which we translate1 8,the cattle upon a thousand hills10 as referring to 8,behemoth upon a thousand hills10 and says-- 8,this is he that is prepared for the banquet of the time to come1 for he eats up the produce of a thousand hills in one day1 and every day they grow again40 ,the context of these words evidently show that ,rashi1 the most popular1 and the most read of all the ,jewish commentators1 looked for a real1 not an allegorical1 feast upon the flesh of the ,leviathan and ,behemoth4 ,the preceding and following words speak not of allegorical1 but of real cattle and fowls4 ,according to ,rashi1 the whole passage would read thus3--8,i will take no bullock out of thy house1 nor he-goats out of thy folds4 ,for every beast of the forest is mine1 and ,behemoth upon a thousand hills4 ,i know all the fowls of the mountain10 c4 ,here1 then1 ,behemoth is introduced amongst real animals all fit for food1 so that it is impossible to take it figuratively4 ,this animal is also suitable in size for so great an entertainment2 he consumes the produce of a thousand mountains every day4 ,this was also the opinion of ,jonathan1 for in his ,targum on the fiftieth ,psalm he has paraphrased the tenth verse as follows3-- 8,for every beast of the wood is mine1 and ,i have prepared for the righteous in ,paradise pure cattle1 and the wild ox1 that feeds every day upon a thousand mountains40 ,all these testimonies 7and many more might be added7 plainly prove1 that the ,jews1 in times past1 looked for a real and substantial feast upon ,leviathan and ,behemoth2 and when we remember that the commentary of ,rashi is the first that is put into the hands of the ,jewish youth all over the world1 and that it is generally regarded as almost1 if not altogether1 inspired1 it is easy to conclude what is the opinion of the great majority of ,jews1 even in the present day1 as to this entertainment4 ,maimonides1 indeed1 denies that there will be any eating and drinking in the world to come4 ,he says-- 4 8,in the world to come there is neither body nor corporeality1 but only the souls of the righteous without a body1 like the ministering angels4 ,so neither is there eating and drinking40 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 viii4 #b47 ,but this is a solitary opinion1 as is evident from the note on the passage by ,abraham ben ,dior1 who says-- 8,the words of this man are1 in my eyes1 very near to those of him who says1 that there is no resurrection to the body1 but only to the soul2 and ,i sware by my life that this was not the opinion of our wise men of blessed memory40 ,indeed ,maimonides himself acknowledges1 in his ,commentary upon the ,mishna1 that the majority of the ,jews thought very differently of the world to come4 ,he there enumerates five classes of opinions1 amongst which one is1 that at that time the earth will bring forth clothes ready made1 and bread ready baked2 but in every one of the five1 good eating and drinking is a main article4 ,of the fifth class he says-- 8,and the fifth class 7and they are numerous7 include all these things1 and say that the great hope is1 that ,messiah shall come and raise the dead1 and they shall be gathered into ,paradise1 and there shall eat and drink and be in good health to all eternity40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #aai1 col4 #a47 ,this1 then1 ,maimonides gives as the general expectation of the majority1 and this expectation exactly agrees with the above description of the feast to be prepared from ,leviathan and ,behemoth4 ,we have1 therefore1 not only the testimony of the most celebrated rabbies to prove that this feast is not allegorical but literal1 but we have the still stronger evidence of the general expectations of the nation as enumerated by ,maimonides4 ,d4 ,levi ought1 therefore1 to have said that he understood it allegorically1 but we have seen that this is not the opinion of the nation1 nor of the most celebrated rabbies4 ,we are therefore warranted in saying that the prayers of the synagogue not only consecrate the intolerance of the ,talmud1 but also stamp its absurd legends with authority4 ,it is surely not exceeding the bounds of soberness and modesty to call this story of the battle between ,leviathan and ,behemoth1 and the feast to be prepared of their flesh1 and the salt meat of the female ,leviathan1 an absurd legend4 ,david ,levi evidently thought it was such1 and was therefore glad to betake himself to allegory4 ,in the ,bible there is not one word about the killing or salting of the female ,leviathan1 nor about the capacious stomach of ,behemoth1 which requires a thousand mountains daily to satisfy it4 ,this is all the pure invention of the rabbles1 and we ask the ,jews whether such legends form fit subjects for the prayers or praises of the synagogue1 or whether they can be acceptable in the eyes of the ,god of ,israel8 ,we do not mean to conceal the fact1 that ,christian prayer-books may be found with legends as fabulous1 and as foolish4 ,but they are the prayer-books of former generations1 or of those who still adhere to traditions of men4 ,with them we have nothing to do4 ,three hundred years have now elapsed since our forefathers cleared out all such follies4 ,but the ,jewish prayer-books still remain unchanged1 and unless the ,jews make some vigorous effort1 the legend of ,leviathan and ,behemoth will be read with all solemnity in the synagogues of ,england at the coming ,feast of ,pentecost4 ,it is grievous to think that that nation which once held up the torch of ,divine truth to enlighten the world1 should still abide in the darkness and superstitions of the ,talmud4 ,and yet this is1 beyond all doubt1 the condition of ,israel1 so long as the ,divine authority of the ,talmud is recognised in their public prayers4 ,individuals may say1 that they do not believe in its follies1 nor cherish its intolerance1 but this cannot be said of the majority4 ,the synagogue1 in its public worship1 still pronounces the maledictions1 and recites the legends of the oral law1 and thus declares1 in the most solemn manner that can be devised1 that the religion of the ,talmud is the religion of the congregation4 ,a mere confession of faith is nothing to such a declaration as this4 ,a man may trifle with his fellow-men1 but sentiments addressed to ,god in prayer or praise must justly be considered as the language of the heart4 ,how different is the doctrine of the ,new ,testament4 ,there all these monstrous fables are utterly rejected2 there is not even an allusion to them4 ,mahomet1 confessedly the author of a false religion1 has incorporated not a few of the ,talmudic legends into the ,koran4 ,but the disciples of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 though they lived at a time when the patronisers of these fables had power1 were altogether preserved from such absurdity4 ,they have transmitted no such distorted view of ,god's dealings in creation1 nor of the joys which he has prepared for his people in eternity4 ,their doctrine is1 that1 8,known unto ,god are all his works from the beginning of the world40 7,acts xv4 #ah47 ,he is 8,the ,father of lights1 with whom is no variableness nor shadow of turning40 7,james i4 #ag47 ,they also give us an account of the felicity of the blessed1 but a feast upon ,leviathan or ,behemoth is not one of its features4 8,behold1 the tabernacle of ,god is with men1 and he will dwell with them1 and they shall be his people1 and ,god himself shall be with them1 and be their ,god4 ,and ,god shall wipe away all tears from their eyes2 and there shall be no more death1 neither sorrow1 nor crying2 neither shall there be any more pain3 for the former things are passed away40 7,rev4 xxi4 #c1 #d47 8,beloved1 now are we the sons of ,god1 and it doth not yet appear what we shall be2 but we know that1 when he shall appear1 we shall be like him1 for we shall see him as he is40 7#a ,john iii4 #b47 ,these are the hopes and expectations which that body of ,jews1 who rejected the oral law1 have taught us to entertain and to cherish4 ,yes1 brethren of the house of ,israel1 our hope is altogether ,jewish4 ,we do not mean to charge upon 8the peculiar people of ,god0 the folly of the ,talmud4 ,some of the nation forsook the pure ,word of ,god1 and adopted the doctrine of an oral law4 ,the natural consequence was1 that they advanced gradually farther and farther in the mazes of error2 and there all their followers continue4 ,but we never forget that it was another portion of the ,jewish nation which taught us to worship the true and living ,god4 ,our only wish is1 that you would forsake ,jewish error1 and embrace ,jewish truth4 ,footnote #ai3 ,this alludes to 4 ,see ,job xl4 #ae1 c4 ,d4 ,levi4 ,no4 ,,xviii4 ,,rabbinic ,,legends ,,continued4 ,that the traditions of the ,talmudists abound with the most absurd and incredible stories1 is a matter of notoriety4 ,but when a ,talmudist is pressed with any one of these1 as a proof that the oral law is not from ,god1 he has a ready answer4 ,it is an allegory1 and contains the most profound and mysterious wisdom4 ,it would be very easy to show from the books printed in ,jewish-,german1 for the edification of the women and the unlearned1 and where the legends are related as undoubted matter of fact1 that this is a mere evasion4 ,but we have other evidence that is indisputable4 ,the ,liturgy of the synagogue alludes to many as to authentic history1 and we would not believe any one who should dare to assert1 that the ,rabbinists1 in prayer1 utter with their lips1 what they do not believe in their heart4 ,in the ,pentecost prayers1 from which we have already quoted1 we find allusion to an anecdote recorded of ,adam1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,which ,d4 ,levi thus translates1 8,it 7the ,sabbath-day7 is the end of all work above and beneath2 it is accounted the seventh among the days2 the first convocation of seasons2 holy to the ,lord of hosts2 a glorious holy ,sabbath to those who rest thereon2 it redeemed the first created man from judgment2 he chanted a song1 and appeased the wrath of ,god40 7fol4 #ha47 ,here two important circumstances1 not mentioned by ,moses1 are alluded to4 ,first1 that the ,sabbath redeemed ,adam from judgment1 and secondly1 that his song appeased the wrath of ,god4 ,they are found in the traditions of the rabbies at full length1 and are related as follows3-- 4 4 4 4 4 8,at the seventh hour of the day1 on the eve of the ,sabbath1 the first ,adam was introduced into ,paradise2 and the ministering angels were engaged in lauding and introducing him4 ,but between the suns1 on the eve of the ,sabbath1 he was driven out1 and went forth2 and the ministering angels were calling to him1 and saying1 #8,adam being in honour abideth not3 he is like the beasts that perish4' ,it is not written1 #8like a beast that perishes1' but #8like the beasts that perish2' i4e41 they both4 ,the ,sabbath-day came1 and became an advocate for the first ,adam4 ,it said before ,god1 ,lord of the world1 in the six days of the creation1 nothing in the world was killed1 and wilt thou begin with me8 ,is this my sanctification1 and is this my blessing1 as it is said1 #8,and ,god blessed the seventh day1 and sanctified it4' ,therefore by the merit of the ,sabbath-day ,adam was delivered from the judgment of hell2 and when ,adam saw the power of the ,sabbath1 he said1 ,it was not for nothing1 that the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 blessed and sanctified it1 so he began singing and chanting to the ,sabbath-day1 as it is said1 #8,a psalm or song to or for the ,sabbath-day4' 7,psalm xcii4 #a47 ,rabbi ,ishmael says1 ,this psalm was said by the first ,adam1 but was forgotten in all the generations1 until ,moses came and restored it40 7,pirke ,eleazar1 fol4 #ac1 col4 #c47 ,the ,yalkut ,shimoni gives the story substantially the same1 excepting that when ,adam said1 8,a psalm or song to the ,sabbath-day10 the ,sabbath reproved him1 and said1 8,dost thou sing hymns to me8 ,come and let us both sing hymns to the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 #8,it is a good thing to give thanks unto the ,lord4'0 7,ps4 xcii4 #a47 ,this1 then is the story which the prayer-book of the synagogue authenticates1 by interweaving1 in its addresses to the ,god of ,israel1 the above-quoted words concerning the ,sabbath1 8,it redeemed the first created man from judgment2 he chanted a song1 and appeased the wrath of ,god40 ,from first to last it bears the plain marks of mendacity4 ,it misrepresents the merciful character of ,god1 as if he would have destroyed ,adam1 had it not been the ,sabbath-day4 ,it ascribes a certain degree of merit to ,adam1 who had been guilty of the most inexcusable ingratitude to his ,divine ,benefactor4 ,and it directly contradicts the narrative of ,moses1 who ascribes the mercy vouchsafed to the spontaneous over-flowings of the grace of ,god4 ,besides all this1 it is perfectly ludicrous to imagine that ,adam1 just driven out of ,paradise for his disobedience1 with the curse of the ,almighty resting upon him1 goaded by the pangs of a guilty conscience1 and his whole frame undergoing the mighty transition from immortality to corruption--it is perfectly ludicrous to imagine that he could be in a fit mood to sit down and compose a poem4 ,indeed the rabbies themselves have not left this story a fair appearance of credibility1 for on the very same page of the ,yalkut1 where this origin of the ninety-second ,psalm is described1 another equally veracious incident in the life of ,adam1 is assigned as the occasion of its composition4 8,rabbi ,levi says1 this hymn was said by the first ,adam4 ,adam happened to meet ,cain1 and said to him1 ,what has been done in the matter of thy judgment8 ,he replied1 ,i have repented1 and been reconciled4 ,adam began to strike his forehead with his hand1 and said1 ,so great is the power of repentance1 and ,i did not know it6 ,immediately the first ,adam stood1 and said this ,psalm40 ,thus1 on the showing of the traditions themselves1 this legend1 formally adapted in the prayers of the synagogue1 is a falsehood4 ,can this be acceptable worship8 ,is it reasonable worship8 ,is the legend itself1 in any of its features1 worthy of that great people1 that received the law of ,god at ,sinai8 ,this is the religion of the ,high-priests and ,pharisees who rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth1 this the wisdom of those who condemned ,him1 and that fully accounts for their conduct4 ,men1 who had let loose their imaginations into the regions of romance and fiction1 were not likely to love the sober truth inculcated by ,jesus and his disciples4 ,their appetites were vitiated1 and they were not satisfied with the unadorned narrative of ,moses4 ,they had lost all relish for the simple majesty of the 8oracles of ,god40 ,we appeal to the native acuteness1 and unsophisticated feeling of every right-minded ,jew1 and ask whether it is not a melancholy spectacle to behold the wise men of ,israel thus trifling with the sin of ,adam1 that sad event1 the source of all our woes8 ,very different is the tone in which the ,new ,testament speaks both of it1 and of the mind of ,god in reference to it4 8,wherefore1 as by one man sin entered into the world1 and death by sin2 and so death passed upon all men1 for that all have sinned3 for until the law sin was in the world2 but sin is not imputed when there is no law4 ,nevertheless death reigned from ,adam to ,moses1 even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of ,adam's transgression1 who is the figure of ,him that was to come4 ,but not as the offence1 so also is the free gift4 ,for if through the offence of one many be dead1 much more the grace of ,god1 and the gift by grace1 which is by one man1 ,jesus ,christ1 hath abounded unto many40 7,romans v4 #ab-ae47 ,but whatever the ,jews may think of the ,new ,testament representation1 we have have shown that their ,liturgy contains an absurd legend1 borrowed from tradition ages ago1 and which remains there to this day4 ,but1 alas6 the very next sentence of the prayer1 from whim we have quoted1 contains two more4 1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 8,it 7the ,sabbath7 is noted as a sign and a witness between the heavenly ,father and his children3 observe its removals1 as taught by the wise men1 not to bring out a load from within2 death is pronounced against those that profane it1 either by excision or stoned with stones2 by the manna it was well known unto thee in ancient days1 for on the ,sabbath that food did not descend2 the necromancers were not answered on it2 remember that on it the incomprehensible river resteth40 ,amongst the other honours of the ,sabbath-day1 and the other testimonies to its sacredness1 this prayer recounts two miracles4 ,the one1 that necromancers could not bring up the dead on that day2 the other1 the weekly ,sabbatarian rest of the river ,sambation4 ,the first of these miracles has been left by ,d4 ,levi without notice or explanation4 ,he thought1 perhaps1 that it would not do in ,english4 ,but to the second1 the resting 8of the incomprehensible river0 he has attached the following note3-- 8,this denotes the river 1 said to rest on the ,sabbath from throwing up stones1 c41 which it does all the week4 ,see ,sanhedrin1 fol4 lxv4 #b2 ,yalkut on ,isaiah1 fol4 lii4 #a2 ,pesikta1 ,tanchuma1 sect4 4 ,see also ,shalsheleth ,hakkabala1 and ,juchsin40 ,d4 ,levi himself thus acknowledges1 that no allegory is here intended1 but that the ,rabbinists do really believe that there is a river that throws up stones all the week1 and rests on the ,sabbath-day4 ,many and various are the accounts which the rabbies give of it1 but we shall confine ourselves to one or other of ,d4 ,levi's references1 which also throw light upon the subject of the necromancers4 4 4 8,turnus ,rufus1 the wicked1 also proposed this question to ,r4 ,akiva1 saying1 ,why is the ,sabbath-day better than other days8 ,he replied1 ,why art thou greater than other men8 ,he answered1 ,so is the will of my ,master4 ,the rabbi said1 ,so is it with the ,sabbath1 such is the will of ,god4 ,turnus ,rufus said1 ,but ,i mean to say1 who will prove to me that this day is the ,sabbath-day8 ,the rabbi answered1 ,the river ,sambation will prove this2--a necromancer will prove this2--the grave of thy father will prove this1 for the smoke is not made to ascend from it on the ,sabbath40 7,sanhed4 fol4 #fe1 col4 #b47 ,in his commentary upon this passage1 ,rashi says of the ,sambation1 8,the ,sambation is a certain river of stones1 which rolls along all the days of the week1 but on the ,sabbath-day it is perfectly still40 ,he also explains to us what is meant by the smoke not ascending from the grave on the ,sabbath-day1 in the following note3 8,on all the other days of the year a smoke was made to ascend from the grave of the father of ,turnus ,rufus1 for he was suffering the judgment of burning1 but on the ,sabbath-day1 the sinners in hell have rest40 ,whether ,turnus ,rufus saw the smoke or not1 the ,talmud does not inform us1 but the ,bereshith ,rabba1 another work of equal credibility in such matters of fact1 tells the story a little more at length1 and informs us that he was not satisfied with the argument drawn from the river ,sambation4 ,r4 ,akiva therefore advised him to cite his father from the dead on the ,sabbath and the other days1 and that this experiment would convince him4 ,to this ,turnus ,rufus consented1 and the results are described in the following words3-- 4 8,his father came up every day of the week1 but on the ,sabbath-day he did not come up4 ,on the first day of the week he brought him up again1 and said to him1 ,father1 hast thou been made a ,jew since thy death2 why is it that thou comest up on all the other days of the week1 but not on ,sabbath8 ,he replied1 ,whosoever will not keep the ,sabbath voluntarily in your world1 must keep it here in spite of himself4 ,he then said1 ,father1 have you then got work on the other days of the week1 and rest on the ,sabbath8 ,the father replied1 ,on the other days of the week we are judged1 but on the ,sabbath we are at rest40 7,bereshith ,rabba1 fol4 #i1 col4 #d47 ,such are the legends which the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 on the solemn feast of ,pentecost1 stamps with all the authority of authentic history4 ,is it necessary to prove to the ,jews of ,england that both these stories are utterly untrue8 ,is it necessary to say1 that there is not1 and never was1 such a river as the ,sambation8 ,within a century the world has been explored in every direction4 ,from ,cooke to ,kotzebue the globe has been many times circumnavigated1 but none has brought us any tidings of the ,sambation4 ,since the times of ,benjamin of ,tudela1 and ,abraham ,peritsol1 there has been a host of adventurous travellers1 but none had the luck to behold the miraculous torrent of the ,sambation4 ,in this very city ,jews are occasionally found from every part of the world1 but from the banks of the ,sambation no messenger has yet arrived4 ,the whole account is a fiction1 and is unworthy of a place in the prayers of the ,jews of ,england4 ,the same may be said of the necromancers1 who obtain no answer on the ,sabbath-day4 ,it is nothing more than a clever fiction4 ,by the law of ,moses necromancy is forbidden to the ,jews1 and therefore the inventor well knew that no pious ,jew would ever make the experiment1 either on the ,sabbath or the other days4 ,the story of ,turnus ,rufus1 and his father1 as told in the ,bereshith ,rabba1 is plainly contrary1 even to the assertions of the oral law itself4 ,the father is made to say1 8,whosoever will not keep the ,sabbath voluntarily in your world1 must keep it here1 in spite of himself20 which implies that all1 who do not keep the ,jewish ,sabbath1 must be punished in the flames of hell2 whereas the oral law says that the observance of the ,sabbath is not required of the sons of ,noah4 ,when this prayer was introduced into the ,liturgy of the synagogue we know not1 but there it now stands1 and in one short paragraph contains three downright falsehoods4 ,david ,levi himself points us to ,r4 ,akiva as the author of the last two2 and accordingly the ,talmud records the original reference to the business of the necromancers and the river ,sambation1 as proceeding from the mouth of that great ,rabbi4 ,this brings us back to the time immediately succeeding the rejection of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and shows us the superstition and the falsehood of those who rejected him4 ,either ,r4 ,akiva invented these things himself1 and then he is guilty of deliberate falsehood1 or he received these accounts from others who went before him1 and then he was a superstitious man1 and the guilt of inventing falsehood is thrown back on the earlier rabbies4 ,what is to be thought then of the wisdom of those men who were weak enough to believe1 or wicked enough to invent1 such absurd fables8 ,yet these are the men who opposed ,christianity1 and this is the system which a large portion of the ,jewish nation has preferred for #agjj years4 ,that the ,rabbinical ,jews have firmly believed these legends is plain4 ,they occur in the ,talmud1 whose authority is regarded as divine4 ,they are repeated by ,rashi1 ,ramban1 ,bechai1 and a whole host of the most esteemed ,jewish writers4 ,they have formed a part of the synagogue service for centuries1 and are still found in the ,prayer-books of the ,english ,jews1 to testify that they are not yet emancipated from the chains of superstition4 ,if they had been1 if any considerable number of ,jews had been convinced of the falsehood of these stories1 they would never have suffered them to remain in the worship of ,god4 ,it is utterly impossible to suppose that men would sanction the solemn propagation of falsehood1 and yet whenever the ,pentecost prayers are read or printed1 there the fables of ,behemoth and ,leviathan1 ,adam and the ,sabbath1 ,turnus ,rufus and the ,sambation1 are solemnly accredited to the world as worthy of all belief and honour4 ,the fact that they constitute a part of a solemn address to ,almighty ,god1 and that not from an individual1 but from the congregation of ,israel1 gives them a sanction that nothing else could confer4 ,the foreign ,jew who comes to ,england from some country where there is not so much light1 might1 if he found such fables struck out of the ,english synagogue service1 obtain a little light1 and go back to his countrymen with the news1 that the enlightened ,english ,jews have rejected all these absurdities2 and thus the moral emancipation of the nation might be prepared throughout the world4 ,but no2 the superstitious ,talmudist from ,turkey1 or from ,barbary1 or the ,north1 arrives in ,england1 goes to the synagogue1 and finds the same fables and the same superstitions that he had learned in his less favoured native land1 and returns as he came4 ,perhaps he takes with him a copy of the synagogue prayers1 printed in ,london1 and exhibits to his countrymen ,behemoth and ,leviathan1 the necromancers and the ,sambation1 adorned with all the beauty of ,english printing1 paper1 and binding4 ,there is surely a great and solemn responsibility resting on those ,israelites who do not believe these fables1 to protest against their admission into the prayers of the synagogue4 ,the honour of the nation1 the welfare of their brethren1 and the glory of ,god1 all call for such a public protestation4 ,the ,jewish nation is a great and intellectual people1 highly gifted by ,god with those powers that adorn and dignify humanity4 ,but this is not the estimate formed by the world at large4 ,why not8 ,because the world at large knows only the fables and absurdities of the ,talmud1 but is ignorant of the real monuments of ,jewish genius4 ,what can be said1 then1 by an advocate for the ,jews1 to one who holds the ,jewish mind cheap8 ,all arguments will prove powerless as long as these instances of superstition and folly are contained in the ,jewish prayers4 ,the objector will still point to them1 and say1 ,if you want to know what men really believe1 do not look at their controversial works1 or their apologetic writings1 but examine their ,prayer-book4 ,consider not what they say to man1 but listen to what they say to ,god4 ,there they are sincere4 ,what can we answer to this argument8 ,can we say that all the follies and intolerance of former generations are expunged8 ,no2 whether from love or from listlessness1 there they abide to this day4 ,but the honour of the nation is but of small weight compared with its spiritual and temporal prosperity4 ,the ,english ,jews might1 by erasing all such passages1 and thoroughly reforming their ,prayer-book1 prove a blessing to their brethren scattered through the world4 ,do the intelligent and enlightened part of the nation really wish to raise their brethren in the moral scale8 ,it must be done by purifying their religious notions4 ,there is an inseparable bond of union between religion and moral virtue4 ,superstition degrades and enfeebles the mind2 but zeal for the glory of ,god calls still more loudly upon every devout ,israelite to vindicate the honour of that revelation which ,god consigned to their care1 and which is obscured by these fabulous additions4 ,no4 ,,xix4 ,,legends ,,in ,,the ,,prayers ,,for ,,pentecost4 ,one of the most glorious circumstances in the national history of ,israel1 as well as one of the most extraordinary facts in the records of mankind1 is the descent of the ,lord ,god upon ,mount ,sinai to proclaim the law4 ,glorious it is for ,israel1 for never did nation hear the voice of the ,lord1 speaking out of the midst of the fire1 as ,israel heard4 ,the display of ,god's grace and favour is the glory of his people1 and here they were both displayed pre-eminently4 ,the grandeur and awfulness of the scene we cannot now enter upon1 except to remark1 that the grandeur of the reality is equalled by the dignity of the narrative1 which ,moses has left us in the #aith and #bjth chapters of ,exodus4 ,none but an inspired historian could have treated an event so honourable to his nation1 with such majestic simplicity4 ,the style and tone furnish an irresistible evidence to the truth of the relation4 ,and perhaps this evidence is much strengthened by the contrast presented in the writings of the rabbies4 ,there is no part of the ,scripture history which they have more amplified by additions of their own2 as plainly stamped with falsehood1 as the other with truth4 ,we have here a wide field before us1 but shall confine ourselves to those legends which are authenticated in the synagogue prayers for the anniversary of that great event4 ,in the morning service for the second day is found an account of the giving of the law1 in which the following wonderful passage occurs3-- 1 1 8,dread seized the holy hosts1 when thou didst turn the mountain over them as a tub3 they received the pure law with fear and tremor40 7,d4 ,levi's ,pentecost ,prayers1 fol4 #aej47 ,here is a circumstance in the giving of the law1 which few readers of the ,pentateuch will remember4 ,all will grant that to see ,mount ,sinai hanging over them1 like a tub or an extinguisher1 was a very dreadful sight1 if it really happened4 ,but surely every reasonable ,israelite will inquire upon what evidence it rests8 ,in all the previous history ,god appears as a merciful ,father1 visiting his children in their affliction1 redeeming them from bondage1 and exhibiting miracle after miracle as their safety or their necessity required2 how is it1 then1 that ,he appears so suddenly in the character of a tyrant or a destroyer1 ready to drop the mighty mountain upon the heads of his people1 and cover them up for ever under the rocky mass8 ,moses throws no light upon the subject4 ,the oral law1 the ,talmud1 must explain the mystery4 1 8,and they stood at the nether part of the mountain 7or beneath the mountain74 7,exod4 xix4 #ag47 ,r4 ,avdimi1 the son of ,chama1 the son of ,chasa1 says1 ,these words teach us that the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 turned the mountain over them like a tub1 and said to them1 ,if ye will receive the law1 well2 but if not1 there shall be your grave4 ,r4 ,acha1 the son of ,r4 ,jacob1 says1 ,this is a great confession for the law40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #hh1 #a47 ,from this extract it appears that the whole foundation of the fable is a sort of pun upon the words 1 8beneath the mountain10 or as the ,english translators rightly have it1 8at the nether port of the mountain40 ,r4 ,avdimi thought that these words meant1 as ,rashi says1 1 8under the mountain in the strictest sense of the words40 ,but then the puzzle was1 how the ,israelites got into that situation4 ,r4 ,abdimi's imagination supplied the rest4 ,but in the first place1 the word occurs often enough in both the singular and plural1 but never has this signification4 ,in the second place1 this fable directly contradicts the ,mosaic account4 ,god had already sent notice to inform the people of the giving of the law1 and they had replied1 8,all that the ,lord hath spoken we will do40 7,ver4 #h47 ,in the third place1 if the mountain was turned over them like a tub1 how did ,moses get up to the top1 and what necessity was there for the command1 8,go down1 charge the people1 lest they break through80 c4 7,ver4 #ba47 ,and lastly1 if the law was forced upon the ,israelites contrary to their wish1 cannot they make this an apology for disobedience8 ,is not this what ,r4 ,acha1 the son of ,jacob1 actually does1 when he says1 8,this is a great confession for the law80 ,so at least ,rashi explains his words4 8,a great confession1 for if he call them to judgment1 saying1 ,why have ye not kept that which ye took upon yourselves1 they have an answer1 that they were forced to receive it40 7,rashi ,comment4 in loc47 ,and this fable1 contrary to the narrative of ,moses1 derogatory to the mercy of ,god1 and subversive to the principle of human responsibility1 the rabbies have introduced into the prayers of the synagogue1 and there it still stands as an evidence of the absence of ,god's ,spirit from those who rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and imposed the oral law upon ,israel4 ,but this want of wisdom appears not only in the nature of the additions which they have made to the ,word of ,god1 but also in the conflicting statements which these additions contain4 ,in the legend just given ,israel is represented as having been unwilling to receive the law1 and yet in the morning service for the first day of ,pentecost1 we have an allusion to another legend1 which describes the great reward bestowed upon them1 because they received it with such a ready mind4 1 1 1 1 1 8,they willingly took the yoke of his law upon them1 and caused the expression1 #8,we will do1' to precede1 #8,we will hearken2' before they heard it they said1 #8,we will do1' and which was accounted for righteousness to them2 and they were dignified with two crowns2 and rendered awful with the sovereignty of the priesthood1 and the ,levitical institution40 7,pentecost ,prayers1 fol4 #hf47 ,at first sight it would appear as if this were a mere figurative expression to denote either the priesthood and the ,levitical institution1 or the monarchy and the priesthood4 ,but then a difficulty occurs1 why are only two crowns mentioned8 ,every one knows that in a figurative sense the oral law says that ,israel is crowned with three crowns1 as it is said1 8,israel is crowned with three crowns1 the crown of the law1 and the crown of the priesthood1 and the crown of the kingdom40 7,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah1 chap4 iii4 #a47 ,why then does this prayer only mention two8 ,it is because it refers to a totally different circumstance4 ,the number of the crowns1 and the reason assigned for their bestowal1 8because they caused the expression #8,we will do1' to precede #8,we will hearken1'0 both identify the allusion as being made to the following ,talmudic legend3-- 8,in the hour when ,israel caused1 #8,we will do1' to precede #8,we will hearken1' there came six hundred thousand ministering angels1 one to each ,israelite1 and invested him with two crowns1 one answering to #8,we will do2' and the second answering to #8,we will hearken4' ,but when ,israel sinned1 there descended twelve hundred thousand evil angels1 and took them away3 as it is said1 #8,the children of ,israel stripped themselves 7or were stripped7 of their ornaments by the mount ,horeb4'0 7,ex4 xxxiii4 #f47 7,shabbath1 fol4 #hh1 #a47 ,here1 then1 is no allegory1 no allusion to the allegorical crowns of ,israel1 but a narrative of a supposed fact1 which occurred in the history of each of the six hundred thousand ,israelites who went forth from ,egypt4 ,the commentary in the ,talmud evidently treats this as a grave and authentic history1 for it tells us the material of which the crowns were composed4 8,the two crowns were crowns of glory1 therefore1 when ,moses wore them the skin of his face shone40 ,from this it is evident that the ,rabbinists considered this legend to be as authentic as the fact recorded in the ,bible 7,exod4 xxxiv4 #cj71 that the skin of ,moses' face shone4 ,they were not satisfied with the honour conferred upon ,moses1 but were led1 by a vainglorious feeling1 to extend it to every individual ,israelite1 and to add what is not said of ,moses1 but what increases the marvellousness of the narrative1 that six hundred thousand angels descended for the purpose of crowning ,israel1 and that twice that number was necessary for the removal of the crowns once conferred4 ,but how does this story agree with the former8 ,if the ,israelites were compelled to receive the law against their will1 by the terrors of the mountain hanging over their heads1 what great merit was there to deserve these two crowns8 ,if the ,israelites were so willing1 and received such a glorious reward1 what necessity was there for turning the mountain over them like a tub8 ,these stories are inconsistent in themselves1 without foundation in the ,word of ,god1 and are therefore unworthy of a place in the prayers of ,israel4 ,but this prayer has other particulars equally wonderful1 to which we proceed4 ,a sentence or two farther on1 this prayer describes the effect which the delivery of the ten commandments produced upon ,israel4 1 1 8,when he spoke the first word1 his world was terrified1 and when they heard two commandments1 they moved backward the space of twenty-four miles40 7,pentecost ,prayers1 fol4 #hg47 ,to understand this1 we must again refer to the ,talmud1 which gives us the particulars4 8,rabbi ,joshua1 the son of ,levi1 says1 as each commandment proceeded from the mouth of the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 ,israel retreated twelve miles1 and the ministering angels led them back1 as it is said1 #8the angels of the host did flee apace4' 7,ps4 lxviii4 #ac47 ,do not read #8they fled2' but 1 #8they led4'0 7,shabbath1 fol4 #hh1 #b47 ,in this short passage we have two deliberate alterations of the ,word of ,god1 in order to square it with this absurd tradition4 ,in the first place1 8,kings of hosts0 is changed into 8angels of hosts10 and in the second place1 8,they fled10 is changed into 8they led40 ,these alterations do of themselves throw discredit upon the story which requires them1 and not only upon this story1 but upon the whole oral law1 which allows such trifling with the ,word of ,god4 ,but our business is at present with the legend1 and as it is told a little more circumstantially in the ,jalkut1 it will be well to give that version of it also4 8#8,they removed and stood afar off' 7,exod4 xx4 #ah7--;a distance of twelve miles4 ,this shows us that ,israel retreated backwards twelve miles1 and then advanced forwards twelve miles1 altogether twenty-four miles1 as each commandment was delivered4 ,thus they travelled in that day two hundred and forty miles4 ,at that time the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 said to the ministering angels1 ,descend and help your brethren1 for it is said1 #8,the ,kings of hosts did lead1 did lead4' 7,ps4 lxviii4 #ac47 ,that is1 they led when they went1 and they led them when they returned40 7,jalkut ,shimoni1 part i4 fol4 #ec1 #a47 ,it is hardly needful to point out the absurdity of this narration4 ,just think of the ,israelites running away twelve miles1 when they heard a commandment1 and then brought back again1 and then running away again4 ,how unlike the simple and dignified narrative which ,moses has left6 ,we ask every intelligent ,israelite what he thinks8 ,is this story a falsehood8 ,if so1 why is it left in the prayers of the synagogue8 ,if it stood alone1 we might suppose that by some oversight or other it had crept in1 but we have already noticed many like it1 and the very next sentence of this same prayer contains another4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,when he came down to speak to the immortal people1 the people of the world were moved1 dread seized them1 and trembling laid hold on them2 pain troubled them as a woman in travail3 they were shaken and disturbed1 and their shadow departed from them2 they all came to ,kemuel1 to divine with their erroneous divinations1 and asked him1 ,what is this that hath happened to the world8 ,perhaps the world is this day to return to its chaos40 ,the preceding story told us what happened to ,israel1 the allusion in this sentence tells us of the terror which came upon the ,gentiles2 but to understand the allusion1 we must again refer to the ,talmud4 1 1 1 8#8,and ,jethro the priest of ,midian heard4' 7,exod4 xviii4 #a47 ,what was it that he heard which induced him to come and be a proselyte8 ,r4 ,joshua says1 he heard of the war with ,amalek1 for immediately before it is written1 #8,and ,joshua discomfited ,amalek and his people with the edge of his sword4' 7,exod4 xvii4 #ac47 ,r4 ,eliezer1 the ,modite1 says1 he heard the giving of the law1 for when the law was given to ,israel1 his voice went from one end of the world to the other1 and all the nations of the world were seized with trembling in their temples1 and they repeated a hymn1 as it is said1 #8,in his temple doth every one speak of his glory4' 7,psalm xxix4 #i47 ,they gathered themselves together to ,baalam the wicked1 and said to him1 ,what is the voice of the tumult which we have heard8 ,perhaps a flood is coming upon the world4 ,he replied1 #8,the ,lord sitteth upon the flood2 yea1 the ,lord sitteth ,king for ever4' 7,verse #aj47 ,the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 has sworn long since that ,he will not bring a flood upon the world4 ,they replied1 ,he will not bring a flood of waters1 but ,he will bring a flood of fire6 for it is said1 #8,by fire will the ,lord plead4' 7,isaiah lxvi4 #af47 ,he answered them1 ,he has sworn long since that he will not destroy all flesh4 ,what1 then1 is the voice of the tumult which we have heard8 ,he said to them1 ,god has had a most desirable good in the house of his treasures1 which has been treasured up with him for nine hundred and seventy-four generations before the creation of the world1 and he now seeks to give it to his children1 for it is said1 #8,the ,lord will give strength to his people4' ,then they all began and said1 #8,the ,lord will bless his people with peace4'0 7,ps4 xxix4 #aa47 7,zevachin1 fol4 #aaf1 #a47 ,this is the fable to which your prayers refer1 and which all ,israel throughout the world is taught to believe1 and to commemorate in the solemn act of public worship4 ,that it is a mere fable is very easy to prove4 ,first1 it contradicts the narrative given by ,moses4 ,this fable says that the tremendous noise made at the giving of the law1 brought ,jethro to ,moses--that this was what he heard4 ,but if you will read the whole verse1 from which the ,talmud quotes a few words1 you will find that there was no occasion for asking what ,jethro heard1 for ,moses himself expressly tells us what he heard1 and why he came4 8,when ,jethro1 the priest of ,midian1 ,moses' father-in-law1 heard of all that ,god had done for ,moses1 and for ,israel his people1 and that the ,lord had brought ,israel out of ,egypt1 then ,jethro10 c4 7,exodus xviii4 #a-e47 ,if you will read the whole chapter1 you will find that ,jethro was come and gone before the law was given1 and consequently before the tremendous noise was made2 so that it is certainly false that this was the cause of his coming4 ,secondly1 that all the nations heard the voice of ,god is false1 for it also contradicts the language of ,moses1 who makes it the peculiar privilege of ,israel1 that they alone heard the voice4 8,did ever people hear the voice of ,god speaking out of the midst of the fire1 as thou hast heard1 and live80 7,deut4 iv4 #cc47 ,lastly1 this story is palpably absurd4 ,the ,talmud represents ,balaam and his ,gentile contemporaries quoting ,scripture like two rabbies1 and that1 hundreds of years before the portions which they quote were written6 ,they both quote the #bith ,psalm1 a ,psalm of ,david1 about #ejj years before he was born1 and the ,gentiles quote the #ffth of ,isaiah above #gjj years before it was written6 ,and your rabbies have not been content to keep this absurd and foolish story in the ,talmud1 but have inserted it in the prayers for the solemn festival of ,pentecost4 ,according to these prayers1 you are taught to believe that1 at the giving of the law1 ,god turned ,mount ,sinai over the people of ,israel like a tub1 and compelled them to receive the law against their will2 and yet that1 for their ready obedience1 six hundred thousand angels were sent down to crown each man with two crowns4 ,you are taught to believe that when the commandments were given1 ,israel walked backwards and forwards two hundred and forty miles4 ,and that the voice of ,god was so loud that it was heard by all the nations of the world1 who all went to ,balaam1 and all knew and quoted the ,psalms and the prophets1 centuries before they were written4 ,this is what you have got by following the oral law4 ,it is in vain for you to say that you do not believe these things--there they stand in your ,prayer-book4 ,if you do not believe them1 why do you leave them there8 ,but whatever individuals may say1 it is evident that the compilers of the ,jewish ,liturgy heartily believed every word of them1 and therefore introduced them into their prayers4 ,and it is equally certain that1 wherever the ,talmud maintains its authority1 these fables form part of the faith of ,israel4 ,but some will say1 ,we do not believe them4 ,why not2 ,do you disbelieve them because they are true8 ,no1 but because they are false4 ,then you confess that the oral law contains downright palpable falsehoods1 and that in many of its narrations it is not worthy of credence4 ,of what value1 then1 is the oral law1 and what credit can we give to the authors of it1 who did not scruple to invent these foolish stories8 ,no4 ,,xx4 ,,legends ,,in ,,the ,,prayers ,,for ,,pentecost4 ,nearly eighteen centuries have now elapsed since a large portion of the ,jewish nation deliberately chose ,rabbinism in preference to ,christianity4 ,the great question between ,jews and ,christians is1 whether those persons made a right choice4 ,the means of answering the question are within our reach4 ,the oral law exists1 diffused through the volumes of the ,talmud1 and compressed in the prayers of the synagogue4 ,there we can look for it1 and judge of its spirit and its intrinsic excellence and evidence4 ,the ,rabbinists say1 that the oral law was given to ,moses on ,mount ,sinai1 and that the oral law which they now possess1 is identically the same as that then received2 and they appeal in proof of this assertion to the continuity of its transmission from father to son down to the present day4 ,the ,christian objects that this oral law is full of fables4 ,the ,talmudist replies by making a distinction between the the laws and the ,agadah1 or legendary part3 and the ,christian is satisfied or silenced until he opens the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 and finds that the most absurd and improbable of all the ,talmudic legends are there recognised as undoubted verities1 and integral parts of modern ,judaism4 ,many of these1 and sufficient to annihilate all claims which the oral law can make to truth1 have been examined1 but as this part of the subject is important1 two more must be considered before we can at present take leave of them4 ,in the sentence immediately following our last extract from the ,jewish prayers we read as follows3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,which ,d4 ,levi thus translates1 8,and every generation1 and its governors that existed before them1 and those that rose after them1 were all placed at ,mount ,sinai with them1 to let them know1 that the intelligent generation was more acceptable than them2 to make them understand good judgment and knowledge3 there was no blemish in them1 for they were entirely perfect40 7,pentecost ,prayers1 p4 #hg47 ,the assembling of the living nation of ,israel1 to hear the voice of the ,creator1 was not grand enough for the rabbies1 they have therefore added that the souls of all the unborn generations were present to hear and receive the law4 ,the comparison of this tradition with some already considered suggests several interesting topics for inquiry4 ,for instance1 whether these souls were under the mountain or not when it was turned over them--whether they performed the journey of two hundred and forty miles backwards and forwards at the giving of the ten commandments1 c48 ,but the authority1 which this tradition confers on the oral law1 demands our more immediate attention1 and is particularly manifest in that version of the story1 which is found in ,medrash ,rabba4 1 1 1 1 1 1 8#8,and ,god spake all these words1 saying4' 7,exod4 xx4 #a47 ,r4 ,isaac says1 that all those things1 which the prophets were to prophesy in every generation1 they received from ,mount ,sinai1 for so ,moses says to ,israel1 #8,but with him that standeth here with us this day1 and also with him that is not here with us this day4' 7,deut4 xxix4 #ae47 ,here in the latter clause1 it is not said1 #8,that standeth with us this day1' but #8,with him that is not here with us this day4' ,these are the souls that were to be created1 who had no corporeal existence1 and of whom therefore it could not be said they stood there4 ,but although they did not exist in that hour1 every one of them received his own1 and so it is written1 #8,the burden of the ,word of the ,lord to ,israel in the hand of ,malachi4' 7,mai4 i4 #a47 ,here it is not said in the days of ,malachi1 but in the hand of ,malachi1 for this prophecy had been long since in his hand1 even from ,mount ,sinai3 but up to that time permission had not been given him to prophesy4 ,in like manner ,isaiah says1 #8,from the time that it was1 there am ,i4' 7,isaiah xlviii4 #af47 ,isaiah means to say1 ,from the day that the law was given there was ,i1 and ,i received this prophecy1 only #8,now the ,lord ,god and ,his ,spirit hath sent me2' that is1 until then permission had not been given him to prophesy4 ,but it was not the prophets only who received their prophecy from ,sinai1 but also the wise men in every generation1 each one of them received his own from ,sinai1 and so it is said1 #8,these words the ,lord spake unto all your congregation4' 7,deut4 v4 #bb470 7,shemoth ,rabba ,parashah1 #bh47 ,the object of this fable is very plain1 it is to clothe the rabbies with infallible authority4 ,it is here asserted that the rabbies of every generation were all present at the giving of the law1 and each received immediately from ,sinai those legal decisions and doctrines which he was to communicate to the world1 and consequently every thing1 that a rabbi teaches1 is infallibly right and true1 and as authoritative as the words of ,moses and the prophets1 for 8,god spake all these words10 as this legend interprets this verse4 ,the rabbies of every generation are included1 so that1 according to this tradition the wise men of ,israel1 even in this degenerate time1 still deliver infallible instructions which they received more than three thousand years ago from the mouth of ,god himself4 ,but this fable avers too much4 ,if all ,israel was present at ,sinai1 and each individual1 whether prophet1 or rabbi1 or layman1 received the law at that time1 what use was there in the transmission from father to son1 from the time of ,moses down to us8 ,nay1 more1 what use is there in teaching at all1 for every man then received his own8 ,nay1 further1 what use is the written law1 for if every man was taught at ,sinai1 there is no need for him to read and learn now8 ,but this is a matter which every ,israelite can decide for himself4 ,let him ask himself1 how much he remembers of this wonderful event in his existence1 his presentation at ,sinai1 and his reception of the law from the ,lord himself4 ,the ,scripture proofs which are here given are evidently nothing to the purpose4 ,the first proof is1 8,god spake all these words1 saying40 7,exod4 xx4 #a47 ,but every one who will take the trouble of reading the chapter will see1 that 8all these words0 cannot apply to the prophecies1 nor to the decisions of the rabbies1 but to the ten commandments and to them only4 ,so far from delivering all the decisions and comments since taught by the rabbies1 ,god spake only the ten commandments to the people1 and when they heard these1 8they said unto ,moses1 ,speak thou with us and we will hear2 but let not ,god speak with us1 lest we die40 7,verse #ai47 ,to say1 therefore1 that ,god's speaking 8all these words0 includes the whole oral law and all the rabbinical comments1 is gross perversion of the text1 and direct contradiction of ,moses' account4 ,the next and most usual verse adduced to prove this fable is ,deut4 xxix4 #ad1 #ae1 where it is said1 8,neither with you only do ,i make this covenant and oath2 but with him that standeth here with us this day1 before the ,lord our ,god1 and also with him that is not here with us this day40 ,but this verse plainly proves the contrary1 that the other generations of ,israel were there in no sense whatever4 ,the ,hebrew words are as strong as they can be4 ,those with whom the covenant is made are divided into two classes1 8,him that standeth here10 and 8,him that is not here40 ,if the word standeth had been repeated1 if the verse said1 8,with him that standeth here1 and with him that standeth not here10 there might have been some colour for this fable3 the rabbies might have urged that though the unborn generations did not stand there1 they stood somewhere else2 but the present wording of the verse utterly excludes all possibility of existence1 either corporeal or incorporeal4 8,with him that is not here1 0 shows that they were there in no sense4 ,the proof taken from ,malachi1 8,the burden of the word of the ,lord to ,israel in the hand of ,malachi10 is nonsense4 ,every one1 that knows anything of ,hebrew1 knows that signifies 8by10 8by means of40 ,but even taken literally1 it will not prove that ,malachi was at ,sinai2 there is nothing in the words to inform us when ,malachi received the prophecy4 ,the proof from ,isaiah is more unhappy still4 ,the whole context shows that it is ,god who speaks in that verse1 and not the prophet4 ,indeed we might ask1 if ,isaiah had already received all his prophecies at ,sinai1 what was the use of the vision of the ,lord sitting upon his throne1 and the commission which is there given8 7,isai4 vi47 ,and so we might ask concerning most of the prophets4 ,the case of ,samuel is here particularly worthy of consideration4 ,according to the above tradition cited in the ,jewish prayers1 ,samuel had been at ,sinai1 and there received all that he was to deliver during his sublunary existence4 ,and yet when the word of the ,lord came to him1 he did not recognise the ,divine call1 and three times went to ,eli1 and it was ,eli who at last told him that it was ,god4 ,now how is this written history to be reconciled with the above tradition8 ,the tradition says that ,samuel had heard the voice of ,god at ,sinai1 that there all the prophetic words which he was ever to deliver were made known to him1 and yet the ,bible says1 8,now ,samuel did not yet know the ,lord1 neither was the word of the ,lord yet revealed unto him40 7#a ,sam4 iii4 #g47 ,the last proof1 taken from ,deut4 v4 #bb1 if considered in its context1 also proves the contrary4 ,the tradition quotes only a part of the verse1 8,these words the ,lord spake unto all your congregations20 but if you read on you will find1 8,and he added no more10 which words plainly limit the first sentence to the ten commandments4 ,this tradition1 then1 as being contrary to ,scripture1 to the law of ,moses1 is a falsehood1 and is therefore unworthy of a place in the prayers of that people1 whom ,god selected from all the nations of the earth to be his witnesses1 and the depositories of his truth4 ,but this tradition is objectionable not only as a fable1 though that is a very strong objection to any thing proposed as an article of faith1 but on account of the purpose which it was intended to serve4 ,it was invented for the purpose of strengthening the spiritual tyranny of the ,scribes and ,pharisees over the minds of the people4 ,it is not therefore merely an erroneous interpretation of ,scripture1 nor the dream of a fanatic imagination1 but the deliberate invention of men who knew what they were about1 and had an object which they were endeavouring to compass1 and for the attainment of which they did not stick at deliberate falsehood4 ,they were1 however1 too wise to confine all the advantages of this appearance at ,sinai to themselves2 they asserted that the whole people of ,israel obtained an advantage which makes them superior to all other nations4 ,the prayer which we have quoted above alludes to this1 when it says1 8,there was no blemish in them1 for they were all entirely perfect40 ,this sentence rather puzzles an ordinary reader of the ,bible1 who thinks of the conduct and character of ,israel as there described2 the ,talmud1 however1 helps us to understand this eulogy3-- 1 1 1 8,why are the ,gentiles defiled8 ,because they did not stand upon ,mount ,sinai1 for in the hour that the serpent came to ,eve1 he communicated a defilement1 which was taken away from ,israel when they stood on ,mount ,sinai3 but the defilement of the ,gentiles was not removed1 as they did not stand on ,sinai4 ,rav ,acha1 the son of ,rabba1 said to ,rav ,ashai1 how1 then1 does it fare with proselytes8 ,he replied1 although they went not there1 their good fortune 7or star7 was there1 as it is written1 #8,with him that standeth here with us this day1 before the ,lord our ,god1 and also with him that is not here with us this day4' 7,deut4 xxix4 #ae470 7,shabbath4 fol4 #ade1 col4 #b1 at the bottom of the page47 ,the commentary on this passage quotes still further particulars from ,siphri1 and says-- 1 8,all that stood on ,mount ,sinai were sanctified and purified1 and were healed from every blemish1 even the blind and the lame that then happened to be in ,israel1 as is taught in ,siphri40 ,in this part of the fable the inventors of the oral law endeavour to flatter the vanity of the ,israelites1 and thus to engage their affections in behalf of that tradition which was to secure their own power4 ,the ,scribes understood well the deceitfulness of the human heart1 and knew that men love to hear and are ready to believe any thing that tends to their own personal aggrandizement4 ,but in thus flattering the people1 they were turning their backs upon that example which ,moses set them2 and contradicting the whole current of ,scripture testimony4 ,moses and the prophets1 as the servants of ,god1 told the people of their sins and their evil deeds1 that they might repent and be saved4 ,their object was not to secure popular favour1 nor to advance their own selfish purposes2 they therefore could afford to be honest and to speak truth4 ,the inventors of the oral law1 on the contrary1 were endeavouring to erect a fabric of personal honour and power3 they were therefore obliged to address themselves to the weak side of the human heart2 and in doing so1 were compelled to run counter to the plainest declarations of ,god's ,word4 ,all men and every nation like to be told that they are superior to the rest of the world1 and are distinguished by moral endowments from the mass of mankind4 ,the inventors of the oral law1 therefore1 told ,israel that they were far elevated above all other nations1 for they had been cleansed at ,sinai from that innate defilement which still contaminates all the rest of the children of men4 ,but is this true--is this what ,moses and the prophets say8 ,moses says1 8,understand1 therefore1 that the ,lord thy ,god giveth thee not this good land to possess it for thy righteousness3 for thou art a stiff-necked people40 8,ye have been rebellious against the ,lord from the day that ,i knew you40 7,deut4 ix4 #f1 #bd47 ,isaiah says of ,israel1 8,from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it1 but wounds1 and bruises1 and putrifying sores40 8,ah6 sinful nation6--a people laden with iniquity2 a seed of evil-doers--children that are corrupters40 7,isaiah i4 #d-f47 ,and again he says1 8,woe is me1 for ,i am undone3 because ,i am a man of unclean lips1 and ,i dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips40 7,isaiah vi4 #e47 ,jeremiah says1 8,can the ,ethiopian change his skin and the leopard his spots8 ,then may ye also do good that are accustomed to do evil40 7,jer4 xiii4 #bc47 ,and again1 8,all these nations are uncircumcised1 and all the house of ,israel are uncircumcised in the heart40 7,jer4 ix4 #bf47 ,the ,lord himself says to ,ezekiel1 8,son of man1 ,i send thee to the children of ,israel1 to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me3 they and their fathers have transgressed against me to this very day4 ,for they are impudent children and stiff-hearted40 7,ezek4 ii4 #c1 #d47 ,and again1 8,thou art not sent to a people of a strange speech and of an hard language1 but to the house of ,israel3 not to many people of a strange speech and of an hard language1 whose words thou canst not understand2 surely had ,i sent thee to them1 they would have hearkened unto thee4 ,but the house of ,israel will not hearken unto thee3 for they will not hearken unto me2 for all the house of ,israel are impudent and hard-hearted40 7,ezek4 iii4 #d1 #g1 c47 ,we do not quote these passages to show that the ,gentiles have a more favoured constitution of moral nature4 ,far from it2 in reading these accounts given by the prophets1 we recognise the features of our own picture4 ,far be it from us to glory2 we cite these passages to show you how miserably your oral law endeavours to blind and delude you by flattering your vanity4 ,it tells you that you have been purged from every stain2 ,moses and the prophets teach you the truth--that you are just like the other sons of men1 and have no moral superiority or advantage whatever4 ,we wish to point out to you how the system of rabbinism is diametrically opposed to ,moses and the prophets1 and above all1 to impress upon you that the authors of this oral law are not worthy or your confidence1 for they have1 for their own private interests1 invented narratives and doctrines which contradict that ,word of ,god1 which ought to be ,israel's glory4 ,we wish to show you how certain principles of evil pervade every part of that system1 not even excepting those prayers which are offered up in the public worship of ,god4 ,there these fables also occur1 and we ask every ,israelite who loves the law of ,moses or hopes in the promises of ,god by the prophets1 how he can conscientiously stand by in the synagogue and hear the words of ,moses and the prophets openly contradicted8 ,how can he remain silent when the reader declares of ,israel that there is no blemish in them1 for they are all entirely perfect1 when he knows and feels that he and all his brethren are just as frail1 as sinful1 and as imperfect as the other sons of men8 ,how can they expect the return of ,god's favour to their nation so long as these fictions are made a part of public worship8 ,moses teaches very different doctrine4 ,he says1 8,if they shall confess their iniquity1 and the iniquity of their fathers1 with their trespass which they have trespassed against me1 and that also they have walked contrary unto me2 and that ,i also have walked contrary unto them1 and have brought them into the land of their enemies3 if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled1 and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity3 then will ,i remember my covenant with ,jacob1 and also my covenant with ,isaac1 and also my covenant with ,abraham will ,i remember3 and ,i will remember the land40 7,levit4 xxvi4 #dj-db47 ,here ,moses makes a conviction and acknowledgment of guilt1 an indispensable preliminary to the return of ,god's favour to the nation4 ,israel must feel that1 so far from being cleansed from all impurity1 their heart is uncircumcised1 and this uncircumcised heart must be humbled2 but how is this possible1 so long as the oral law and the prayers of the synagogue teach that the ,israelites are the most righteous of mankind1 because they received the law1 which the other nations rejected--and the most pure1 or rather the only pure1 of mankind1 inasmuch as they were cleansed from every taint at ,sinai8 ,these doctrines harden the heart against true humility1 prevent true repentance1 and thereby retard the happiness and the glory of ,israel4 ,no4 ,,xxi4 ,,legends ,,in ,,the ,,prayers ,,for ,,pentecost4 ,if ,moses or the prophets had any where recorded1 that ,god had1 along with the written law also given an oral law1 our duty would then be to find out where it is3 and to inquire whether that oral law1 which now forms the keystone of modern ,judaism1 is the one which was given by ,god4 ,but neither ,moses nor any other prophet has said one word on the subject4 ,the words 8oral law0 are no where to be found in the ,bible1 nor is there any mention of the thing itself4 ,if the ,bible had plainly alluded to the existence of the thing1 we should not quarrel about the name1 which might have been invented for the sake of brevity and convenience4 ,but it is remarkable that when ,moses commanded the law to be read publicly in the ears of all the people1 he says not a syllable about the oral explanation1 which if it existed must at least have been of equal importance2 and still more so that the succeeding prophets should have observed such a profound silence about that1 which now constitutes the main substance of ,israel's religion1 and is the key to the observances and prayers of the synagogue4 ,this silence is in itself suspicious1 and compels us to examine the evidence of its transmission4 ,the first step here is to ascertain the character of the witnesses1 who say that they received the oral law from their fathers and transmitted it to their posterity4 ,if it appear that1 in their general testimony1 they were disinterested and truth-loving persons1 who have never been convicted of distorting truth for their private advantage1 nor of receiving and circulating fables as authentic history1 their testimony in this particular matter will be of considerable value4 ,but if it can be proved that either from a deliberate desire to deceive1 or from an incapacity to weigh evidence and to distinguish between fact and fiction1 they have transmitted a huge mass of foolish fables as authentic history1 then their testimony is worth nothing1 and the story of an oral law having no other evidence must be classed amongst the other fables which have come down to us on their authority4 ,that the account of the giving and transmission of the oral law rests solely and exclusively on the testimony of the rabbies is clear from the account itself1 as it is found in the ,jad ,hachasaka4 1 1 1 4 8,all the commandments which were given to ,moses were given with their explanation1 for it is said1 #8,i will give thee the tables of stone and the law and the commandment4' 7,exod4 xxiv4 #ab47 #8,the law1' this is the written law1 #8,and the commandment1' this is the explanation thereof4 ,and he has commanded to fulfil #8the law' according to #8the commandment4' ,and the commandment is that which is called ,the oral law40 ,truly the rabbies must have been hard set when they chose this passage to prove the existence of an oral law4 ,the keen and clear mind of the sagacious ,rambam evidently felt the difficulty2 he1 therefore1 to give some plausibility to the proof1 omitted the concluding part of the sentence which he quotes from the ,bible4 ,he says1 8,as it is written #8,i will give thee tables of stone and the law and the commandment1'0 and there he stops1 but let every ,israelite open his ,pentateuch and read the remainder1 and he will find the whole sentence to be this1 8,i will give thee tables of stone1 and the law and the commandment which ,i have written1 to teach them40 ,not one word here about an oral law1 but about that which ,god had written4 ,it is true that the passage of the ,talmud from which ,rambam derived this doctrine gives the whole passage1 but it appears from the process of abbreviation which he has applied1 as if he were ashamed of the explanation there given and thought it more prudent to omit it4 ,but as it is one of the main passages which support the doctrine of an oral law1 it must be considered4 1 8,r4 ,levi bar ,chama says1 ,r4 ,simon ben ,lakish says1 what is that that is written #8,i will give thee tables of stone1 and the law and the commandment which ,i have written to teach them8' #8,the tables' are the ten commandments4 #8,the law' is the written law4 #8,the commandment' is the ,mishna4 #8,which ,i have written' means the prophets and sacred writings4 #8,to teach them' means the ,gemara4 ,it teaches us that they were all given to ,moses from ,sinai40 7,berachoth1 fol4 #e1 col4 #a47 ,can any man of common understanding receive this interpretation1 which throws all grammar and context to the winds1 and gravely asserts that not only the law and its explanation1 but the prophets and the whole ,talmud1 were given to ,moses at ,sinai8 ,will he give up his own reason and the word of the living ,god to the authority of ,r4 ,simon ben ,lakish8 ,there cannot possibly be any argument which would prove the falsehood of the narrative concerning the oral law so completely as this interpretation1 which is regarded as one of its main foundations4 ,the words of ,moses which are here perverted plainly speak of that which ,god had written4 8,i will give thee tables of stone1 and the law and the commandment which ,i have written to teach them40 ,did ,god write the oral law1 and give it to ,moses8 ,what became of it then8 ,if it was written1 how did it become oral8 ,these words 8,which ,i have written10 have sadly puzzled the rabbinical commentators1 who know not how to reconcile the plain and obvious sense of the words1 with that interpretation which had been already put upon them in the ,talmud4 ,rashi seemed to think that the difficulty might be got over by saying-- 8,all the six hundred and thirteen commandments are comprehended in the ten commandments40 7,com4 in ,exod4 xxiv4 #ab47 ,but this1 though true in one sense1 will not obviate the difficulty4 ,god promises to give ,moses the law and the commandment which he had written4 ,if the oral law had not been written1 it was not included4 ,saadiah ,gaon1 as quoted by ,aben ,ezra1 proposes another solution3-- 8,the ,gaon says that the words1 #8,which ,i have written1' are to be connected with #8,the tables of stone1' and not with #8,the law and the commandment1' for ,god wrote only the ten words40 ,but unfortunately ,moses has so connected them1 and we have no warrant for reversing his order4 ,aben ,ezra himself1 after giving the ,talmudic exposition1 gives it as his own opinion1 that these words refer to the ten commandments4 ,he says-- 8,but in my opinion1 #8,the law' refers to the first and fifth commandment2 and #8,the commandment' to the other eight40 7,aben ,ezra1 ,com4 in loc47 ,this is about the truth4 ,god gave ,moses the law and the commandment which he had written2 but as ,saadiah admits1 ,god wrote only the ten words1 therefore the ten words are the same as 8the law and the commandments40 ,some will say there is tautology here1 that when ,god says1 8,i will give thee tables of stone10 he means the ten commandments1 and that therefore the additional promise 8of the law and the commandment0 is only an unnecessary repetition4 ,but this is not true4 ,by 8tables of stone10 ,god meant tables of stone4 ,he might have given to ,moses the ten commandments without giving him stone tables1 or he might have given him the tables of stone without giving him the ten words2 but as he intended to give him both1 ,he says1 8,i will give thee tables of stone1 and the law1 and the commandment40 ,neither is there any difficulty in the circumstance that these ten words are called both 8law and commandment40 ,inasmuch as they were a revelation of ,god's will1 they are justly denominated 8law10 2 and as they were proposed as a rule of life1 obedience to which was required1 they are entitled1 8,the commandment40 ,the simple meaning1 therefore1 is1 that ,god promises to give the ten commandments which he had written4 ,every thing else1 and therefore the oral law1 is excluded4 ,this passage1 therefore1 gives no support to the doctrine that ,moses received an oral as well as a written law on ,mount ,sinai4 ,indeed1 the desperate perversion to which this text has been subjected1 throws discredit upon the whole2 and the necessity for such perversion shows that there was no plain text in the writings of ,moses1 to which the inventors of the oral law could appeal4 ,the authority1 then of the oral law must rest altogether upon the character of those witnesses who handed it down4 ,but this is a very sandy foundation1 for we have already seen that these men were guilty of inventing or propagating the most absurd fables2 their testimony1 therefore1 is of no value4 ,this has been proved abundantly already2 but there is one story for which we had not room in our last number1 and which1 as being immediately connected with the giving of the law1 must now be considered4 ,like the others1 it comes before us authenticated by its introduction into the prayers of the synagogue1 in which the following plain allusion is made3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,when he called the messenger 7,moses7 and made him ascend to heaven1 and appointed him as the third person between him and his people1 and caused him to approach and stand in the thick darkness1 and spake to him face to face1 and rays streamed from his hand to him1 the angels were moved1 and rushed towards him2 and in the presence of the ,creator they spake1 saying thus to him1 ,what is man that thou shouldest exalt him8 and wherefore make such an account of him as to bring him up to our place and cause him to inherit the delightful possession 7the law780 7,pentecost ,prayers1 fol4 #hh47 ,here it is plainly said1 that the angels remonstrated with ,god at the favour shown to ,moses4 ,this circumstance is not to be found in the writings of ,moses1 but it is recorded in the ,talmud1 and the particulars are thus given3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,in the hour when ,moses ascended up on high1 the ministering angels said before ,god1 ,o ,lord of the world1 what business has he that is born of a woman amongst us8 ,he replied1 ,he is come to receive the law4 ,they answered1 ,this most desirable treasure1 which has been treasured up from the six days of creation1 six hundred and seventy-four generations before the world was created1 dost thou now wish to give it to flesh and blood--what is man that thou art mindful of him1 and the son of man that thou visitest him8 ,o ,lord1 our ,lord1 how excellent is thy name in all the earth1 who hast set thy glory above the heavens4 ,the ,holy ,one said to ,moses1 ,give them an answer4 ,he replied1 ,o ,lord of the world1 ,i am afraid1 lest they burn me with the breath of their mouth4 ,he said1 ,lay hold on the throne of my glory and give them an answer1 for it is said1 #8,he that holdeth the face of his throne1 he spreadeth his cloud over him4' 7,job xxvi4 #h1 #i47 ,rabbi ,nahum says1 ,this teaches us that the ,almighty spread some of the glory of the ,shechinah and his cloud over him4 ,he then said1 ,lord of the world1 what is written in the law that thou art about to give me8 #8,i am the ,lord thy ,god that brought thee out of ,egypt4' ,he then said1 ,did ye ever go down into ,egypt and serve ,pharaoh--why1 then1 should ye have the law8 ,again1 what is written therein8 #8,thou shalt have none other ,god4' ,he then asked them1 ,do ye then dwell amongst the uncircumcised1 that ye should commit idolatry8 ,again1 what is written8 #8,remember the ,sabbath-day to sanctify it4' ,do ye1 then1 do any work1 so as to need rest8 ,again1 what is written8 #8,thou shalt not take the name of the ,lord1' c4 ,have ye1 then1 any business that would lead to this sin8 ,again1 what is written8 #8,honour thy father and mother4' ,have ye1 then1 got any father and mother8 ,again1 what is written8 #8,thou shalt not kill1 thou shalt not commit adultery1 thou shalt not steal4' ,have ye1 then1 got envy or the leading principle that would lead to these sins8 ,immediately they praised the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he10 c4 7,shabbath1 fol4 #hh1 col4 #b1 c47 ,it is not necessary to prove that this account is a fiction4 ,the absurdity of the whole scene is too palpable4 ,to what purpose should the angels wish for the law of ,moses1 or be envious of men to whom it was given8 ,is it possible that the spirits that minister before the throne of ,god1 were not able to see the unsuitableness of the law for them1 until ,moses pointed it out to their consideration8 ,we think that if this scene had ever taken place1 ,moses might have given them other passages of the law much more to the purpose2 but it is plainly a fable invented by the designing1 and propagated by the credulous4 ,these two stories then1 that ,moses received the oral law1 and that he disputed with the angels in heaven1 come to us upon one authority2 they are both circumstances in one event2 and the fabulousness of the one takes away all credit from the other4 ,the oral law rests solely upon the testimony of its transmitters1 but here these persons are convicted of transmitting palpable falsehood3 their testimony to the oral law is therefore useless1 and the whole fabric of tradition falls4 ,this one fable is sufficient1 but the readers will remember that this is only one of a considerable number selected from the ,jewish ,prayer-book4 ,to extract all similar stories from the ,talmud would be to make some folio volumes4 ,the ,prayer-book1 however1 gives enough to invalidate the testimony of the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 and to incapacitate them for ever from appearing as witnesses4 ,perhaps some one will say1 ,but they are also the witnesses for the written law1 and therefore1 if we reject their testimony1 we must give up the written law also4 ,but this is not so4 ,for that we have other testimony--we have that of the ,jewish nation1 of which the ,scribes and ,pharisees were at first only an inconsiderable portion4 ,we have the testimony of ,jesus and his disciples1 the great opposers of the oral law4 ,we have the testimony of the predictions1 which we behold still accomplishing4 ,we have the whole internal evidence1 so that if there never had been ,pharisees1 the evidence for the written law would be just as valid4 ,as it is1 the contrast which the written law presents1 when compared with the oral law1 furnishes in itself a strong evidence of its truth and authenticity4 ,the written law is simple1 sober1 dignified4 ,the oral law is multifarious1 extravagant1 absurd4 ,the oral law is poison--the written law is the antidote4 ,the oral law is a counterfeit1 which proves the existence of the genuine coin4 ,men who receive both on the sole authority of the rabbies may1 when they find the falsehood of the one1 reject the other also1 but this can never be the case with those who calmly compare and weigh the two in the balance of right reason4 ,we now dismiss these ,talmudic fables for the present4 ,we have proved by instances that the oral law abounds with such4 ,we have proved by extracts from the ,prayers of the synagogue1 that these fables form a part of the faith of all rabbinical ,jews4 ,we have1 therefore1 proved that the inventors of these fables attained their object4 ,they have succeeded in deceiving the great majority of their countrymen4 ,it is for the ,jews of the present day to consider whether these extravagant fictions are still to be handed down to unborn generations--still to appear as a reproach upon ,israel's understanding--still to disfigure and dishonour the public worship of the chosen people4 ,former generations may have handed them down in ignorance1 and be therefore partly excusable4 ,but in the present day there is a large body of ,jews here in ,england who are fully convinced that these legends are false3 it is the duty1 the sacred duly1 of all such to protest against their further propagation4 ,if they do not1 they make themselves accomplices in the guilt of those who invented them1 and responsible for all the injury1 temporal and spiritual1 which the propagation of such error may inflict upon their brethren and their posterity4 ,but whatever course they may pursue1 the existence of these fables shows that the oral law itself is altogether an invention of men1 and proves that ,jesus of ,nazareth conferred a great and substantial benefit on the nation and on mankind1 by vindicating and preserving for us the unadulterated truth of ,god's written ,word4 ,these fables prove further1 that there is neither weight nor value in the sentence which these men pronounce against the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,it is the sentence of those who did not scruple to falsify and pervert the law of ,god2 it is the testimony given by the notorious inventors and propagators of fables1 and cannot be received by any one competent to weigh evidence4 ,fables of any kind will invalidate testimony1 but religious fables utterly incapacitate their inventors and propagators from being admitted as witnesses at all4 ,the man who will venture to tamper with sacred history1 either by adding to1 or diminishing from1 its records1 clearly shows that he has lost all reverence for truth1 and all sense of the divine character1 as a vindicator of truth and a punisher of falsehood4 ,the man who trifles with sacred facts1 cannot be regarded as a witness at all in those which he considers profane or common4 ,when1 therefore1 the ,talmudists1 or the wise men of his time1 bear witness against ,jesus of ,nazareth1 whom they hated1 we must remember that they have been convicted of false witness again and again in the case of ,moses1 whom they professed to love4 ,their testimony is therefore a nullity1 and if we wish to examine the claims of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 we must look elsewhere for the data which are to form the basis of our judgment4 ,no4 ,,xxii4 ,,rabbinic ,,magic4 ,modern ,judaism is the religion of the oral law4 ,the dogmas1 rites1 ceremonies1 and prayers1 all rest upon its authority4 ,if1 therefore1 the oral law can be proved to be an invention of men1 the whole fabric of modern ,judaism crumbles into dust4 ,it then follows that the ,jews have been more than eighteen centuries the disciples of error1 and that1 if they now desire to believe and profess the true religion1 revealed by ,god to their forefathers1 they must renounce their present ,talmudic system1 and return to the law and the prophets4 ,but the oral law is a human invention4 ,it has been proved1 on the authority of the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 that it abounds with the most absurd fables1 which cannot be the ,word of ,god1 but are evidently and obviously the invention of man4 ,it appears1 therefore1 that the ,jewish nation has been for centuries deluded by the traditions of the ,scribes and ,pharisees--that they have been utterly mistaken in their faith1 taking the fictions of men for the truth of ,god--and have thereby sunk from the honourable position1 in which ,god placed them as depositories of the truth1 to the unenviable situation of the credulous and superstitious4 ,such is the result of an inquiry into the contents of prayers of the synagogue4 ,an examination of the traditional commandments will show in like manner1 that the oral law is every where inseparably mingled with fables1 which throw discredit upon the whole4 ,one of the most important parts of the oral law is that which relates to the constitution of the great tribunal the ,sanhedrin1 for1 as is asserted1 that council fixed the authority of all traditions1 and even examined into the claims1 and decided upon the divine mission of the prophets4 ,if it appear1 therefore1 that the oral law teaches what is manifestly fabulous with respect to that tribunal1 the main pillar of tradition is taken away4 ,now without entering into the whole subject at present1 the following specimen will show what degree of credit can be given to the traditional accounts respecting it3-- 8,rabbi ,johannan says1 none were allowed to sit in the ,sanhedrin1 who were not men of stature1 men of wisdom1 men of good appearance1 aged1 skilled in magic1 and acquainted with the seventy languages1 so that the ,sanhedrin might not be obliged to hear through an interpreter40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #ag1 col4 #a47 ,in this short extract there are several fables--first1 that all the members of the ,sanhedrin should be skilled in magic1 or magicians1 is plainly contrary to the express command of ,god1 who says1 8,there shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire1 or that useth divination1 or an observer of times1 or an enchanter1 or a witch --for all that do these things are an abomination unto the ,lord3 and because of these abominations the ,lord thy ,god doth drive them out from before thee40 7,deut4 xviii4 #aj-ab47 ,this command of ,god makes no exception in favour of the members of the ,sanhedrin4 ,it absolutely forbids any such in ,israel for any purpose4 ,the commentary indeed tells us1 that this magical skill was required in self-defence4 8,in order to kill the magicians who trusted in their magical arts to deliver them out of the hands of the tribunal40 ,but this explanation does not mend the matter4 ,magic is a thing absolutely unlawful and expressly forbidden by ,god4 ,it was therefore unlawful either to learn or to practise it1 even for the purpose of killing a magician4 ,if the plea of self-defence or necessity made it lawful for the ,sanhedrin to learn magic1 the same argument would justify it doubly in the case of the people1 who were more likely to be the objects of the magician's attacks2 for surely these persons would be careful to avoid all contact with the members of the ,sanhedrin1 whom they knew to be more than a match for them in the black art4 ,according to this method of arguing all ,israel might have been skilled in magic1 though the law requires that not one such person should be found among them4 ,either then this account is absolutely false1 or the members of the ,sanhedrin were bad men1 who learned what was expressly forbidden by the law of ,god2 and in either case1 the ,talmudic accounts of this tribunal are unworthy of credit4 ,but it may well be doubted whether the members of this great council confined their magical exercitations to the killing of magicians4 ,we find elsewhere1 if the ,talmud speak truth1 that the rabbies at least made other magical experiments1 and have even recorded the means which they employed1 for the benefit of posterity4 1 1 8,abba ,benjamin says1 if permission had been given to see them1 no creature could stand before the hurtful demons4 ,abbai says1 ,they are more than we1 and stand against us like the trench round the garden-bed4 ,rav ,huna says1 ,every one of us has a thousand on his left hand1 and ten thousand on his right hand4 ,rabba says1 ,the want of room at the sermon is caused by them--the wearing out of the rabbies' clothes is caused by their rubbing against them--the bruised legs are caused by them4 ,whosoever wishes to ascertain their existence1 let him take ashes that have been passed through a sieve1 and let him strew his bed1 and in the morning he will see the marks of a cock's claws4 ,whosoever wishes to see them1 let him take the interior covering of a black cat1 the daughter of a first-born black cat1 which is also the daughter of a first-born1 and let him burn it in the fire1 and pulverise it1 and let him then fill his eyes with it1 and he will see them4 ,but let him pour the powder into an iron tube1 and seal it with an iron signet1 lest they should steal any of it1 and let him also seal up the mouth thereof1 that no injury may arise4 ,rav ,bibi bar ,abbai did thus1 and received an injury4 ,but the rabbies prayed for mercy upon him1 and he was cured40 7,berachoth1 fol4 #f1 col4 #a47 ,here1 then1 is magic for the people1 and all ,israel is instructed in the means to see demons4 ,it is not for us to decide whether those1 who might use these means1 would ever see men again1 but this is certain1 that the oral law here gives a magical recipe to those who are not members of the ,sanhedrin1 sets before us one of the ,talmudic doctors as an example1 and moreover encourages to do as he did1 by holding out the possibility of a miraculous cure1 if any injury should arise4 ,if1 then1 this story be true1 the oral law permits magic1 which the law of ,god forbids2 if it be false1 then the oral law is convicted of another monstrous falsehood1 and is altogether unworthy of credit4 ,how long will the people of ,israel suffer themselves to be deluded by a system1 of which the striking characteristic is1 that it has no regard for truth8 ,the ,jews object against ,jesus of ,nazareth1 that he leads them away from the law of ,moses1 but where does he1 or his disciples1 inculcate the study of magic1 or prescribe rules for facilitating intercourse with demons1 contrary to the express command of ,god8 ,just suppose that this whole extract1 instead of being found in the ,talmud1 had formed a portion of the ,new ,testament1 how would the ,jews have laughed at this prescription for its folly1 and argued against its wickedness1 how triumphantly would they have shown that a law that teaches and encourages magic could not have been given by ,god8 ,the existence of one such passage would have been sufficient1 in their eyes1 to condemn the whole ,christian system4 ,let1 then1 the ,jews deal with the oral law in the same way4 ,let them judge it and its fables by an appeal to ,moses and the prophets4 ,but let them remember that in this1 as in many other instances1 the ,new ,testament agrees with the law of ,moses1 whilst the oral law differs from both4 ,the ,new ,testament classes witchcraft along with idolatry1 and other sins which exclude from the joys of eternal life4 8,the works of the flesh are manifest1 which are these3 adultery1 fornication1 uncleanness1 lasciviousness1 witchcraft1 hatred1 variance1 emulations1 wrath1 strife1 seditions1 heresies1 envyings1 murders1 drunkenness1 revellings1 and such like2 of the which ,i tell you before1 as ,i have also told you in times past1 that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of ,god40 7,galat4 v4 #ai-ba47 ,in this case1 then1 where the oral law leads you away from the doctrine of ,moses1 the religion of ,jesus of ,nazareth brings you back again4 ,this is1 however1 not the only fable contained in that short law concerning the members of the ,sanhedrin4 ,we are told1 besides1 that no one was allowed to sit in that council 8unless he understood the seventy tongues40 ,now we would ask every disciple of the oral law calmly to consider this statement1 and then say what he thinks of its veracity4 ,did he ever hear or know of scholars in the present times acquainted with seventy languages1 and that so perfectly as to be able to converse with and examine witnesses1 and form a judgment upon their evidence1 without the aid of an interpreter8 ,surely1 the study of languages is as much cultivated in the present day as it was then1 and there are at least as many facilities for their acquisition4 ,the system of grammar is now fully developed4 ,the art of printing has made it easy to obtain foreign books4 ,lexicons and other apparatus may be procured1 and yet1 with all these facilities1 we much doubt whether there be1 in the whole world1 one single person possessing that knowledge of languages here ascribed to every individual member of the ,sanhedrin4 ,according to the oral law1 there always had been1 in ,israel1 seventy-one such persons at least1 but probably more2 for as a member died1 or became superannuated1 another was found ready to succeed him4 ,but the wonder is here made still more wonderful1 for there were not only seventy-one persons acquainted with seventy languages1 but those persons were also acquainted1 as ,rambam tells us1 with medicine1 astronomy1 and all the existing systems of idolatry1 and moreover skilled in magic4 ,and1 besides all this1 all these persons were fine handsome fellows1 8,men of stature1 men of good appearance40 ,is this credible--can all ,israel1 or all the world1 furnish one such person at present1 handsome or ugly1 tall or short8 or can there be found amongst that intelligent people the ,jews1 one man1 woman1 or child1 so silly as to believe so manifest a falsehood8 ,we can tell them that their great rabbi1 ,rambam1 did not believe it1 and therefore in his ,compendium took the liberty of altering this ,talmudic statement4 ,instead of seventy languages1 he says simply-- 8,and that they should be acquainted with most languages40 ,it was too much for him4 ,being a learned man himself1 he knew the impossibility of such universal knowledge2 and he therefore softened down the ,talmudic hyperbole to the limits of what he considered possibility4 ,this is not merely our conclusion from ,rambam's alteration1 the commentator has expressly said the same3-- 8,our rabbi has written1 #8,acquainted with most languages1' because it is a rarity to find a person acquainted with all the seventy languages40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 #b47 ,rambam himself1 then1 is here a witness against the fabulous exaggerations of the ,talmud4 ,but perhaps some one will say1 that seventy is only a round number to signify many1 that we must not1 therefore1 be too strict in its exposition4 ,this subterfuge1 however1 will not serve here4 ,the authors of the ,talmud said seventy1 because they believed that1 by giving this number1 they included all the languages in the world4 ,they believed that there were seventy nations1 and therefore they said seventy languages4 ,this article of ,jewish faith is found everywhere in the ,talmud1 and in the commentaries1 as for instance-- 8,r4 ,johannan says1 ,what is the meaning of that ,scripture1 #8,the ,lord gave the ,word3 great was the company of those that published it8' ,it teaches1 that as each commandment proceeded from the mouth of ,god1 it was divided into seventy languages40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #hh1 col4 #b47 ,the foundation of this opinion is an arbitrary interpretation or a verse in the song of ,moses4 8,when the ,most ,high divided to the nations their inheritance1 when he separated the sons of ,adam1 he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of ,israel40 7,deut4 xxxii4 #h47 ,upon which ,rashi thus comments3-- 8,on account of the number of the children of ,israel who were to proceed from the sons of ,shem1 and according to the number of the seventy souls of the children of ,israel who descended into ,egypt1 he set the bounds of the people1 that is1 the seventy languages40 ,that this latter clause is altogether arbitrary1 and a mere gratuitous addition1 is plain from an inspection of the text1 where not one syllable is said about the seventy souls1 nor about the number of the nations1 but about the fixing the bounds of their habitations4 ,rashi himself did not trust in this exposition1 and he has therefore given another3--8,on account of the number of the children of ,israel who were to proceed from the children of ,shem40 ,aben ,esra also passes by the seventy nations altogether1 and says that1 8,according to the number of the children of ,israel10 means1 that the bounds of the nations were so set as to leave sufficient room for the ,israelites4 ,his words are-- 8,the commentators have interpreted this of the generation of the dispersion1 when all the earth was scattered1 for then ,god decreed that ,israel should have the land of the seven nations1 which would be sufficient for them1 therefore it is said1 #8according to the number of the children of ,israel4'0 ,this verse1 then1 gives no colour to the opinion that there are only seventy nations and seventy languages4 ,fact proves that the number is much greater1 for the ,bible exists already in twice that number of languages1 and the work of translation is not yet accomplished4 ,the oral law1 therefore1 fails altogether in attaining the object which it had in view in telling this extraordinary story4 ,it wished to say1 that in the ,sanhedrin there never was need of an interpreter1 for that every member understood every language in the world1 and believing that there were only seventy languages1 it stated this number4 ,but now we know that even if each member understood seventy languages1 yet to be able to decide cases for all the nations of the earth1 they would have required to know as many more4 ,the oral law then1 betrays here an utter ignorance of the state of the world1 which shows that it is not from that ,god who confounded the languages of the earth1 and therefore knows how many there are2 but from men who desired to magnify the acquirements of the nation far beyond the sober truth4 ,the men who could deliberately say1 that the ,sanhedrin was composed of seventy-one persons1 all handsome1 all men of stature1 all skilled in magic1 and all so perfectly acquainted with seventy languages1 as to need no interpreter1 would have said seven hundred1 or seven thousand1 or any thing else that suited their purpose4 ,they are evidently wilful exaggeraters1 whose word is therefore not to be trusted4 ,the motive here is vain glory4 ,the object is simply to give all the honour to men1 to the ,rabbies whose learning and genius were so marvellous4 ,there is no intimation that ,god gave the members of the ,sanhedrin this knowledge1 which far exceeds the power or the life of man to attain by ordinary means4 ,no1 all the glory of these marvellous acquirements is ascribed to man alone4 ,this forms a striking contrast to a narrative recorded in the ,new ,testament4 ,we are there told that on a certain occasion the disciples of ,jesus of ,nazareth addressed in their own language1 8,parthians1 and ,medes1 and ,elamites1 and the dwellers in ,mesopotamia1 and in ,judea and ,cappadocia1 in ,pontus and ,asia1 ,phrygia1 and ,pamphylia1 in ,egypt1 and in the ports of ,lybia about ,cyrene1 and strangers of ,rome1 ,jews and proselytes1 ,cretes and ,arabians10 that is1 the inhabitants of sixteen countries4 ,now1 the small number here stated is a presumptive evidence of the truth of the fact4 ,if an impostor1 a ,rabbinist who wished to make a good story1 had written this account1 he would1 beyond all doubt1 instead of sixteen1 have specified all the seventy languages4 ,to his countrymen1 who believed in the acquirements of the ,sanhedrin1 this would have appeared no wise incredible4 ,indeed1 if a man of that time had wished to invent a miracle1 the number seventy would have been absolutely necessary for his purpose4 ,for if every member of the ,sanhedrin could speak seventy languages1 to say that other men spoke sixteen would have been no miracle at all4 ,the small number1 therefore1 here given1 shows that the authors of the narrative had no wish to invent a miracle1 but to state the sober truth4 ,but then consider the entire absence of vain-glory4 ,the praise and the power of speaking even this small number of languages is given altogether to ,god4 ,the men were ,galileans1 and had not acquired this by their own labour and genius4 8,they were all filled with the ,holy ,ghost1 and began to speak with other tongues1 as the ,spirit gave them utterance40 7,acts ii4 #a-aa47 ,here then is a striking difference between the narratives of the ,talmud and those of the ,new ,testament4 ,the former exalts men4 ,the latter gives glory to ,god4 ,no4 ,,xxiii4 ,,astrology4 ,the favourite ,jewish objection to the claims of ,jesus of ,nazareth is that passage at the beginning of the thirteenth chapter of ,deuteronomy3 8,if there arise among you a prophet1 or a dreamer of dreams1 and giveth thee a sign or a wonder1 and the sign or the wonder come to pass1 whereof he spake unto thee1 saying1 ,let us go after other gods1 which thou hast not known1 and let us serve them1 thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet1 or that dreamer of dreams40 ,in citing this passage1 the ,jews take for granted that the religion of ,jesus is essentially different from that of ,moses2 that it leads to the worship of strange gods3 and that it is in fact a species of heathenism1 whilst the religion of the oral law1 which they now profess1 is utterly free from all heathen elements1 and identical with the religion of their prophets4 ,all this they take for granted2 but the subject is capable of being inquired into4 ,the oral law and the ,new ,testament are both extant1 and a little examination will enable us to decide1 on rational grounds1 whether ,judaism or ,christianity savour most of heathenism4 ,in our last number1 we saw that ,judaism contains magic for the ,sanhedrin and magic for the people1 whilst the ,new ,testament utterly forbids it3 in this respect then ,judaism resembles the heathen religion4 ,our business in this number shall be to point out1 in astrology1 another feature of resemblance4 ,the ,talmud and its doctors all agree in asserting the influence of the stars over the fates and fortunes of men4 ,in the first place1 the ,talmud lays down these general maxims3-- 8,life1 children1 and a livelihood depend not on merit1 but on the influence of the stars40 7,moed ,katon1 fol4 #bh1 col4 #a47 8,the influence of the stars makes wise1 the influence of the stars makes rich40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #aef1 col4 #a47 ,but it also tells us the following particulars3-- 444 1 1 4 1 1 8,he that is born on the first day of the week1 will be a man excelling1 but in one quality only4#bj444 ,he that is born on the second day of the week will be an angry man4 ,what is the reason8 ,because on it the waters were divided4 ,he that is born on the third day of the week will be a rich and profligate man4 ,what is the reason8 ,because on it the herbs were created4 ,he that is born on the fourth day of the week will be a wise man and have a powerful memory4 ,what is the reason8 ,because on that day the lights were hung up in the heavens4 ,he that is born on the fifth day of the week will be a benevolent man4 ,what is the reason8 ,because on it were created the fishes and the fowls4 ,he that is born on the eve of the ,sabbath will be a man who makes a circuit4 ,rav ,nachman bar ,isaac says1 who makes the circuit in the commandments4#ba ,he that is born on the ,sabbath1 on the ,sabbath also he shall die1 because on his account they profaned the great day of the ,sabbath4 ,rabba bar ,rav ,shila says1 he shall possess an eminent degree of holiness40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #aef1 col4 #a47 ,here is completely the heathen doctrine of fate4 ,not only the external circumstances of fortune1 but the moral qualities of the soul are made to depend upon the day of a man's nativity4 ,whether a man be profligate or holy1 according to this doctrine1 does in no wise depend upon himself1 his own choice1 or conscience1 but simply on the circumstance of his birth happening on a ,tuesday or a ,saturday4 ,there is indeed a difference of opinion amongst the ,talmudic doctors1 as to the nature of the sidereal influence1 but all agree in the fact1 as may be seen further from the opinion of ,r4 ,huna3-- 4 1 1 1 1 1 8,these things do not depend upon the sidereal influence of the day1 but on the sidereal influence of the hour4 ,he that is born under the influence of the sun will be a splendid man1 eating and drinking of that which belongs to himself1 and will reveal his secrets3 if he be a thief he will not prosper4 ,he that is born under ,nogah 7,venus7 will be a rich and profligate man4 ,what is the reason8 ,because on it the fire was created4 ,he that is born under ,kochav 7,mercury7 will be a man of strong memory1 and wise1 for ,mercury is secretary to the sun4 ,he that is born under the influence of the moon1 will suffer much1 building and destroying1 destroying and building3 eating and drinking what does not belong to him1 and a keeper of his own secrets4 ,if a thief he will prosper4 ,he that is born under ,shabthai 7,saturn7 will be a man whose thoughts come to nought1 but some say those1 that think against him1 shall come to nought4 ,he that is born under ,tsedek 7,jupiter7 will be a righteous man4 ,rav ,nachman bar ,isaac says1 righteous in the commandments4#bb ,he that is born under ,maadim 7,mars7 will be a shedder of blood4 ,rav ,achai says1 either a letter of blood1 or a thief1 or a circumciser4 ,rabbah said1 ,i was born under ,mars4 ,abbai answered1 ,therefore1 you are fond of punishing and killing40 7,shabbath1 ibid47 ,in this passage the heathenism is still more apparent4 ,it is notorious that the ancient ,greek and ,roman idolaters considered ,venus as the patroness of profligacy1 ,mercury as the god of eloquence and learning1 ,mars as the god of war1 and behold6 here in the oral law you have the very same doctrine4 8,if a man be born under ,venus1 he will be a rich and profligate man2 if under ,mercury1 a man of strong memory and wise2 if under ,mars1 a shedder of blood40 ,the habits of the mind are here also expressly attributed to the influence of the planets1 and a thief has got the promise of success1 if his nativity happened under the influence of the moon4 ,what then becomes of human responsibility1 and how does this doctrine agree with the words of ,moses1 8,behold ,i have set before you life and death1 blessing and cursing1 therefore choose life1 that both thou and thy seed may live80 7,deut4 xxx4 #ai47 ,it will be replied by ,talmudists1 that the oral law also says3-- 8,israel is not under the influence of the stars40 ,we shall1 therefore1 consider that passage in its context which immediately follows3-- 8,rabbi ,chanina says1 the influence of the stars makes wise1 the influence of the stars makes rich1 and ,israel is under that influence4 ,rabbi ,jochanan says1 ,israel is not under the influence of the stars1 and ,rabbi ,jochanan helped his argument1 for ,rabbi ,jochanan says1 ,from whence is it proved that ,israel is not under the influence of the stars8 ,because it is said1 #8,thus saith the ,lord1 ,learn not the way of the heathen1 and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven2 for the heathen are dismayed at them4' 7,jer4 x4 #b47 ,the heathen but not ,israel4 ,rav says1 ,israel is not under the influence of the stars1 for ,rabbi ,judah says1 ,rav says1 ,from whence is it proved that ,israel is not under the influence of the stars8 ,from that which is said1 #8,and he brought him forth abroad4' 7,gen4 xv4 #e47 ,abraham said before ,god1 #8,lord of the world1 ,one born in my house is my heir4' ,god replied not so1 but #8,he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels4' ,abraham replied1 ,i have consulted my astrology1 and am not fit to beget a son4 ,god said1 ,go forth from thy astrology1 for ,israel is not under the influence of the stars40 7,shabbath1 ibid47 ,now this passage1 if taken in the most favourable point of view1 proves only that ,israel is not under the influence of the stars2 but this exception proves to demonstration that the oral law teaches1 that all other nations are under that influence4 ,according to this doctrine1 all the ,gentiles1 and of course ,christians among the number1 are given up to unchanging and unchangeable fate4 ,they are good and bad1 rich and poor1 happy and unhappy1 according to the sidereal influence at their nativity1 and consequently are utterly irresponsible for their actions4 ,a ,gentile thief1 or murderer1 or adulterer1 is not so1 because he yielded to temptation1 or to evil dispositions1 but because he happened to be born under the influence of the ,moon1 or of ,mars1 or of ,venus4 ,this is the religion of the oral law1 on the most favourable view of the case1 and consequently ,god is represented first as a partial governor1 who gives constitutional advantages to one favourite nation1 which ,he withholds from all others2 and then1 secondly1 as an unjust judge1 who punishes the ,gentiles for doing what the irresistible influence of the stars compelled them to do4 ,this doctrine is of itself sufficient to prove that the oral law is not of ,god1 and that as a religion it stands upon a line with the heathen and ,mahometan systems of fate1 and is consequently infinitely below ,christianity4 ,the ,new ,testament recognises no system of favouritism1 but represents ,god as a just judge1 8who will render to every man according to his deeds0 7,rom4 ii4 #f72 and all men as responsible for the evil which they commit4 8,there is no respect of persons with ,god4 ,for as many as have sinned without law1 shall also perish without law2 and as many as have sinned in the law1 shall be judged by the law40 7,ibid41 #aa1 #ab47 ,this is a view worthy of the ,divine character1 whereas the astrological system of the oral law1 which represents ,god as giving up all nations to the influence of the stars1 and then punishing them for following that influence which ,he himself ordained1 is nothing short of blasphemy1 and is much more akin to heathenism than to the doctrine of ,moses and the prophets4 ,but1 secondly1 this passage of the ,talmud contains two statements directly contradicting each other4 ,rabbi ,chanina says1 ,israel is under the influence of the stars--the others say1 ,israel is not under the influence of the stars2 whichever statement we receive as true1 the other is necessarily false1 and therefore the oral law contains falsehood1 and therefore is unworthy of credit4 ,thirdly1 the story which is here given of ,abraham has falsehood on the face of it1 and after all does not disprove1 but rather confirms the doctrine that ,israel1 as well as the other nations1 is under the influence of the stars2 for as ,rashi tells us1 ,abraham and ,sarah escaped from their sidereal destiny only by changing their names4 ,rashi's words are-- 8,god said to ,abraham1 ,go forth from thy astrology1 for thou hast seen in the stars that thou art not to have a son4 ,abram is not to have a son1 but ,abraham is to have a son4 ,sarai is not to bear a child1 but ,sarah shall bear a child4 ,i call you by another name1 and thus the influence of the stars will be changed40 7,com4 in ,gen4 xv4 #e47 ,here it is plainly intimated1 and that in the name of ,god himself1 that ,abraham and ,sarah were both under the influence of the stars1 and that if they had not changed their names1 they never could have had a child4 ,this was evidently ,rashi's opinion2 and when we remember that the majority of the ,jews in the world implicitly follow ,rashi's interpretation1 we may conclude that this is the prevailing doctrine4 ,and perhaps some of the readers of this paper may even know instances of ,jews who1 led by this interpretation1 have actually changed their name1 in the hope of bettering their luck1 or even of escaping from death4 ,but however that be1 it is easy to show that the ,talmud and the rabbies generally believe in the astrological influence of the heavenly bodies4 ,in addition to the passages already cited1 the ,talmud says expressly-- 8,an eclipse of the sun is an evil sign to the nations of the world4 ,an eclipse of the moon is an evil sign to ,israel2 for ,israel reckons by the moon1 the nations of the world by the sun4 ,when the eclipse happens in the east1 it is an evil sign to the inhabitants of the east4 ,when it happens in the west1 it is an evil sign to the inhabitants of the west10 c41 c4 7,succah1 fol4 #bi4 col4 #a47 ,the rabbies who have lived since1 teach the same doctrine4 ,for instance1 ,saadiah ,gaon1 speaking of the manner in which the influence of the stars is modified by the signs of the zodiac1 says-- 1 8,sometimes the course of a star is partly in a good sign and partly in a bad sign4 ,the man born under this will first prosper and then suffer adversity4 7,comment4 in ,sepher ,jetsirah1 fol4 #ih1 col4 #a47 ,he also explains1 there1 how it is possible for astrologers to foretell sickness and death2 but this is enough to shew his opinion1 and what he had learned from the ,talmud4 ,the writings of ,aben ,esra bear the same testimony4 ,for instance1 in his commentary on the ten commandments1 he says-- 8,the fourth commandment is that respecting the ,sabbath1 and answers to the orb of ,saturn2 for the experimental philosophers say1 that each one of the ministering servants has a certain day of the week in which he exhibits his strength1 and he is master of the first hour in the day1 and thus it is also with him who is master of the first hour in the night4 ,they say1 also1 that ,saturn and ,mars are the two hurtful stars1 and whosoever begins a work1 or to walk in the way1 when either of these two is in the ascendant1 is sure to fall into harm4 ,therefore our ancients have said1 that permission is given to do injury on the nights of the fourth and seventh days of the week4 ,and behold1 thou wilt not find1 in all the days of the week1 a night and a day1 one after the other1 on which these two hurtful stars rule except on this day2 therefore it is not suitable on it to engage in worldly affairs1 but to devote it entirely to the fear of ,god40 ,this exposition shows that ,aben ,esra believed in astrology1 and that the power of the stars extended to ,israel as well as to the other nations1 nay the power of the stars to do harm is here made the foundation of the command respecting the ,sabbath-day4 ,a man1 whose mind was not thoroughly imbued with faith in astrology1 could never have been led even to entertain such an opinion1 when ,god himself has assigned another and entirely different reason for the institution of the ,sabbath4 ,but indeed it is not necessary to go to the rabbies to prove that modern ,judaism teaches astrology4 ,that common wish which one so often hears amongst the ,jews1 even at the present day1 mazzal tov1 or good luck1 has its origin in the doctrine of the ,talmud1 and shows how universally it has been received4 ,and thus we see the influence which the oral law has had in leading away both learned and unlearned from the ,word of ,god1 and of spreading amongst them1 as a tradition from ,moses1 what is merely one of the numerous errors of heathen idolatry4 ,the heathen worshipped the host of heaven4 ,the sun1 and the moon1 and other heavenly bodies1 they considered as deities2 it was1 therefore1 natural for them to suppose that they exercised an influence over the affairs of men4 ,the ,chaldeans were especially devoted to this doctrine1 and had almost exalted it to the rank of a science4 ,from them1 probably during the ,babylonish captivity1 the ,jaws learned this system2 and though altogether idolatrous in its origin1 and learned from idolaters1 it was congenial to the minds of the superstitious rabbies1 and was1 therefore1 introduced into the oral law1 where it has ever since continued4 ,the oral law has1 therefore1 in this respect1 adopted heathen doctrine1 and teaches heathenism4 ,every ,jew who wishes his neighbour 1 mazzal tov1 uses a heathen idolatrous expression--sanctioned1 indeed1 by the ,talmud1 but utterly repugnant to the doctrine of ,moses4 ,but where will he find in the ,new ,testament any warrant either for such a doctrine or such a wish8 ,the ,new ,testament is entirely free from all shadow and tincture of this heathenism4 ,your oral law has taught you that the course of events depends upon the stars4 ,jesus of ,nazareth has taught us1 that the ordering of all events1 even the minutest1 proceeds from our ,heavenly ,father4 ,he says1 8,are not two sparrows sold for a farthing8 and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your ,father4 ,but the very hairs of your are all numbered40 7,matt4 x4 #bi1 #cj47 ,jesus of ,nazareth1 therefore1 whom you are afraid to follow1 lest he should lead you after other gods1 directs all his followers to the one living and true ,god1 the ,creator1 ,preserver1 and ,redeemer of all things4 ,those men1 on the contrary1 who crucified ,jesus of ,nazareth1 and that oral law1 which you prefer to ,christianity1 have led you away from the doctrines of ,moses and the prophets to the principles of heathenism4 ,the general doctrine1 that the moral nature1 the weal and wo of men1 are altogether dependent upon the stars1 is not ,mosaic1 it is heathen2 and the particular details concerning the influence of ,venus1 ,mars1 and ,mercury1 are plainly the offspring of the worst part of heathen mythology4 ,if1 then1 ,jews believe in this ,talmudic astrology1 they approach very nearly to heathenism1 and such has been the case with the majority and the most learned of the nation for the last eighteen hundred years4 ,if from the unavoidable influence of ,christian knowledge1 they now reject this portion of the oral law1 they declare that all their most learned rabbies have been in gross error1 and that the oral law1 which led them astray1 is not from ,god1 but1 on the contrary1 in one of its most important features1 a mere copy of idolatrous heathenism4 ,footnote #bj3 ,according to ,rashi4 ,footnote #ba3 ,according to ,rashi1 one who goes from house to house to get alms4 ,footnote #bb3 ,rashi says a man who is liberal in almsgiving4 ,no4 ,,xxiv4 ,,amulets4 ,in magic and astrology we have discovered two features common to idolatrous heathenism1 and to the religion of the oral law4 ,we have seen that it pervades the ,talmud and the writings of the subsequent rabbies1 and that it has tinctured the language of every-day life4 ,it occurs1 therefore1 as might be expected1 incidentally1 when the oral law treats of other things2 and we are induced to notice one passage of this kind1 not only because it proves that faith in astrology is an essential element in the religion of the oral law1 but because it sets before us another feature of resemblance to heathenism4 ,in treating of the virtues of amulets1 and of the tests1 whereby to try them and those that write1 the following passage occurs-- 8,rav ,papa says1 ,i am certain in the case of three amulets for three men2 where three copies of one amulet have cured three times1 then both the writer and the amulet are approved4 ,in the case of three amulets for three men1 where each performs only one cure1 then the writer is approved1 the amulet is not approved4 ,in the case of one amulet for three men1 then the amulet is approved1 the writer is not approved4 ,but ,rav ,papa asks1 ,what is to be the decision when there are three amulets for one man8 ,the amulet is certainly not approved1 the writer may or may not be4 ,shall we say that he cured him8 ,or was it perhaps the influence of the stars1 belonging to that man1 that had an affinity for that which was written8 ,that must remain undecided40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #fa1 col4 #b47 ,here we have the influence of the stars again1 and that not in the case of the heathen1 but in the case of ,israelites4 ,the whole passage refers to none but ,israelites4 ,the question1 from which this digression about amulets arose1 was whether it is lawful to wear amulets on the ,sabbath-day1 a question concerning the ,jews1 and them only4 ,in this question1 then1 we find the doctrine of sidereal influence mixed up1 or rather so certainly pre-supposed as to prevent the solution of a doubt4 ,a case is supposed where a man has been cured by the help of three amulets1 and thence arises a doubt as to whether the maker may be considered as an approved writer of amulets2 and upon this case ,r4 ,papa does not venture to decide1 because it is possible that the cure may be owing to the influence of the stars4 ,how can there be a stronger proof of faith in the power of the stars over ,israelites as well as over other persons8 ,this passage proves incontrovertibly that the heathen notion of astrology is inseparably interwoven with the religious system of the oral law1 but it also presents to our consideration another circumstance equally startling1 and that is1 that the oral law sanctions the use of amulets or charms1 as a cure for1 or defence against1 sickness and other evils4 ,what1 is it possible1 that the ,jews who think that their religion is the true religion revealed by ,god to ,moses1 and whose chief objection to ,christianity is the fear lest it should lead them to strange gods1 is it possible that this people should still entertain the old heathen notion concerning amulets8 ,yes1 whilst the followers of ,jesus of ,nazareth have learned from him to renounce this superstitious and wicked practice1 the ,jews1 taught by those who rejected and crucified him1 still believe in the oral law which teaches the manner of making and using charms4 ,but perhaps some one will say1 it occurs only in the ,gemara1 but not in the ,mishna4 ,this is at all times but a poor apology for the oral law1 or rather an open confession that the greatest part of that law is indefensible1 but it will not serve here4 ,the doctrine of amulets proceeds from the ,mishna1 which says1-- 8,it is not lawful to go forth on the ,sabbath-day with an amulet1 unless it be from an approved person40 ,the ,gemara then takes up this commandment1 and comments thus upon it1-- 1 1 8,rav ,papa says1 do not think that it is necessary that both the man and the amulet must be approved2 it is enough if the man be approved1 even though the amulet be not approved4 ,the proof is1 that the ,mishna says1 #8,unless the amulet be from an approved person1' but does not say1 #8,unless the amulet be approved1' from which it is plain4 ,our rabbies have taught thus1 ,what is an approved amulet8 ,any amulet that has effected a cure1 and done so twice or thrice4 ,the doctrine holds good1 whether the amulet be a written one1 or made of roots--whether the man be dangerously ill or not--not only if he be epileptic1 but that he may not become epileptic40 7,shabbath1 fol4 #fa1 col4 #a47 ,from this it appears that there are two sorts of amulets1 one containing some written words1 the other made of roots of various kinds1 and it is equally plain that the object of wearing them was either to prevent sickness or to effect a cure4 ,on the ,sabbath those only are lawful1 which have been manufactured by a man1 who has already established his character for making efficacious amulets1 or which have been already tried and proved to be so4 ,this is the doctrine of the ,talmud1 and let every ,jew remember that this doctrine is not extracted from the legendary part1 but from those laws which are binding upon the consciences of all who acknowledge an oral law4 ,and this is not any private opinion of our own1 as may be seen by referring to any compilation where the laws are collected1 as for instance the ,jad ,hachazakah1 where this law is thus expressed3-- 8,it is lawful to go out with an approved amulet4 ,what is an approved amulet8 ,one that has cured three persons1 or has been made by a man who has cured three persons with other amulets40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 xix4 #ad47 ,the ,arbah ,turim enters more at length into the subject1 thus-- 1 1 1 1 8,it is not lawful to go out in an amulet1 which is not approved1 but if it be approved1 it is lawful4 ,whether it be the man or the amulet1 which is approved1 makes no difference2 for instance1 if a man have written one and the same charm in three copies1 and all three have affected a cure1 the man is approved with respect to that charm every time that he writes it1 but not with respect to other charms2 neither is the amulet approved if written by another4 ,there is also no difference in the case1 when the amulet is approved but the man not so2 for instance1 if a man write one charm1 and only one copy1 and has with it effected a cure three times1 then that copy is approved for every man4 ,a third case is1 when both the man and the amulet are approved2 for instance1 if a man write one charm in three copies1 and each has been of use to three men or to one man three times1 then the man is approved with respect to this charm in every copy which he may write1 and these copies are considered as approved for the use of all men4 ,but if he have written three different amulets for one man1 and have cured him three times1 then neither the man nor the amulet is approved4 ,further1 it is lawful to go out with an approved amulet1 whether it be a writing or one made of roots1 and whether the man be dangerously ill or not4 ,neither is it necessary that he should have been already epileptic1 and now makes use of it for a cure4 ,on the contrary1 if he be of an epileptic family1 and wear it as a preventive1 it is lawful40 7,orach ,chaiim4 sec4 #cja47 ,there can be no mistake here4 ,this is ,jewish law binding upon all who acknowledge tradition4 ,neither is it a doubtful or passing notice2 on the contrary1 the different cases are all enumerated1 and every particular specified4 ,the oral law here gives the most unqualified sanction to the use of amulets or charms1 and that even on the ,sabbath-day4 ,that such charms are near akin to magic or witchcraft is plain from the nature and purpose of the manufacture1 and from the undisguised use of the word 8charms20 but there is a passage in ,rashi's commentary on another ,talmudic treatise1 which puts this beyond all doubt2 we therefore give both the text and the commentary-- 8,our rabbies have handed down the tradition that ,hillel the elder had eighty disciples1 of whom thirty were as worthy as ,moses our master to have the ,shechinah resting upon them4 ,thirty others were as worthy as ,joshua the son of ,nun that for them the sun should stand still4 ,twenty were in the middle rank1 of whom the greatest was ,jonathan the son of ,uziel2 and the least of all was ,rabbi ,johanan ben ,zachai4 ,of this last-named rabbi it is said1 that he did not leave unstudied the ,bible or the ,mishna1 ,gemara1 the constitutions1 the ,agadoth1 the niceties of the law and the ,scribes1 the argument1 a fortiori1 and from similar premises1 the theory of the change of the moon1 ,gematria1 the parables taken from grapes and from foxes1 the language of demons1 the language of palm-trees1 and the language of the ministering angels10 c4 7,bava ,bathra1 fol4 #acd1 col4 #a47 ,this was pretty well1 considering that he was the least of the eighty2 what then must have been the knowledge of the others8 ,this tradition alone1 from its gross exaggeration1 would be sufficient to mark the character of the rabbies as false witnesses4 ,it is plainly a fable1 such as one might expect in the 8,arabian ,nights' ,entertainments10 but not in a law that professes to have come from ,god4 ,it is another proof that the account of the oral law is a mere fiction4 ,but our object in quoting the passage here1 is to point out its connexion with charms and amulets4 ,it tells us1 that this rabbi understood the language of the ministering angels8 ,now what use was this8 ,rashi tells us in his commentary1 to conjure or to adjure them3 that is1 to compel them to serve him1 when he adjured them2 that is1 by their means to act the part of a conjuror4 ,it may perhaps be said1 these were the good angels1 with whom a holy man might hold converse1 but we are also told that he understood 8the language of demons40 ,what was the object of this8 ,rashi answers again-- 8,for the purpose of adjuring them3 and hence it follows that amulets may be made in order to effect cures40 ,from this it appears that the ,talmud allows a man to have converse with evil spirits1 and that this precedent establishes the lawfulness of amulets4 ,and this is the religion of the oral law1 these the doctrines and practices of the men who rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth6 ,here is real heathenism1 not one shade of which appears in the ,new ,testament4 ,oh6 how different is this from the doctrine of ,moses and the prophets4 ,the oral law sends sick men to seek help in amulets and charms1 but not to the ,god of ,israel4 ,now what difference is there between this and the conduct of ,ahaziah1 when he fell down through the lattice in his upper chamber in ,samaria1 and was sick8 8,he sent messengers1 and said unto them1 ,go inquire of ,beelzebub the god of ,ekron1 whether ,i shall recover of this disease4 ,but the angel of the ,lord said to ,elijah the ,tishbite1 ,arise1 go up to meet the messengers of the ,king of ,samaria1 and say unto them1 ,is it not because there is not a ,god in ,israel1 that ye go to inquire of ,beelzebub1 the god of ,ekron80 7#b ,kings i4 #b1 #c47 ,and so it may still be said to ,israel1 ,is it not because there is not a ,god in ,israel1 that ye go to amulets and charms in order to get cured of your diseases8 ,moses points to ,god as the great physician2 he says1 8,wherefore it shall come to pass1 if ye hearken to these judgments1 and keep and do them1 that the ,lord thy ,god shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers4 ,and the ,lord will take away from thee all sickness40 7,deut4 vi4 #ab-ae47 ,god himself says-- 8,i am the ,lord that healeth thee40 7,exod4 xv4 #bf47 ,but the oral law leads men away from ,god1 and tells them to go to an approved man and to get an approved amulet1 and for this allows to learn the language of demons1 and to compel them by adjuration to be subservient4 ,where1 in all the ,old ,testament1 is there any thing like this8 ,when the widow's son was sick1 ,elijah did not give her an amulet to make him well1 and yet1 if there were such things1 it might be supposed that he knew of them1 and knew how to make them2 in short1 that he was an approved man and could make an approved amulet2 but ,elijah's trust was not in such heathen nonsense1 but in the ,god of ,israel4 ,before ,him he prostrated himself and said1 8,o ,lord my ,god1 ,i pray thee1 let this child's soul come into him again40 7#a ,kings xvii4 #bb47 ,when ,hezekiah was sick1 we read not that he sent for an approved amulet1 but that 8,he turned his face towards the wall1 and prayed unto the ,lord40 ,not charms1 but faith and prayer1 are the amulets of the ,old ,testament1 and also of the ,new4 ,the ,lord ,jesus ,christ wrought many miracles of healing1 and multitudes of sick people applied to him for relief1 but he never directed them to amulets in order to attain it4 ,his direction is1 8,be not afraid1 only believe40 7,mark v4 #cf47 ,his disciples also wrought great miracles on the sick1 but not by amulets4 ,their confession is 8,his name1 through faith in his name1 hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all40 7,acts iii4 #af47 ,and their command is1 not to wear amulets1 but to pray4 8,is any sick among you8 ,let him call for the elders of the ,church2 and let them pray over him1 anointing him with oil in the name of the ,lord2 and the prayer of faith shall save the sick1 and the ,lord shall raise him up2 and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him4 ,the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much4 ,elias was a man subject to like passions as we are1 and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain1 and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months4 ,and he prayed again1 and the heaven gave rain1 and the earth brought forth her fruit40 7,james v4 #ac-ah47 ,this is the doctrine of the ,new ,testament1 exactly agreeing with that of ,moses and the prophets1 so that you need not fear that ,christianity will lead you to heathenism3 on the contrary1 it will lead you back from the heathenism of magic and astrology1 and amulets1 to the ,god of ,israel4 ,but there is another feature in this doctrine concerning amulets1 which must not be overlooked1 and that is that the manufacture of amulets may be made a mere trade for collecting the money of the credulous4 ,if a man get a reputation as an approved manufacturer1 the believers in the oral law will naturally apply to him in case of sickness1 or other circumstances1 where amulets are of service1 and of course the remedy is not to be had for nothing4 ,we have known and heard of such things both in the west and in the east4 ,and thus the poor ,israelites are led away from the ,god of ,israel1 and induced1 as the prophet says1 8,to spend their money for that which is not bread1 and their labour for that which satisfieth not40 ,but what a testimony does this whole doctrine furnish to the conduct and the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth8 ,his great endeavour was to show the apostacy of the oral law1 and to lead the people back from tradition to the ,holy ,scriptures4 ,was he right or was he wrong8 ,which is the religion1 of the oral law or of the ,new ,testament1 most agreeable to the religion revealed to ,moses and the prophets4 ,is the practice of magic a ,mosaic doctrine8 ,is permission to hold converse with evil demons a ,mosaic doctrine8 ,is astrology a ,mosaic doctrine8 ,is the manufacture of amulets and charms a ,mosaic doctrine8 ,no2 they are all directly opposed to the doctrine and commandments of ,moses1 and the practice of all the holy men of old4 ,are these things doctrines of the oral law8 ,yes4 ,are they the doctrines of the ,new ,testament8 ,no4 ,christians are taught to abstain from all such things4 ,then in this1 at least1 ,christianity is more like ,mosaism4 ,how long will the ,jews suffer themselves to be thus deluded and imposed upon8 ,many are perhaps ignorant of the details of that system which they profess1 but such ignorance is highly culpable4 ,if men profess a religion they ought to know what it is1 and what are its doctrines1 and what the practices which it prescribes4 ,modern ,judaism teaches1 as the truth of ,god1 all these heathenish notions and practices2 it is time1 then1 for the ,jews to inquire whether this be the true religion in which they have continued for so many centuries1 and if not1 to stand in the ways and ask for the old paths4 ,it is a vain thing for a few individuals of the nation to attempt to deny that these superstitions are an essential portion of modern ,judaism4 ,as long as the oral law is acknowledged to be of ,divine authority1 that oral law must itself be taken as the witness for its own doctrines1 and the standard of the modern ,jewish religion4 ,there is no possible middle course3 either ,jews must altogether and publicly renounce the ,talmud as false1 superstitions1 and heathenish1 or they must be content to be regarded in one of two characters1 either as its faithful disciples1 who believe all it says1 or as timid men-pleasers1 who are afraid to confess the truth of ,god1 or to protest against the errors of man1 lest they should suffer some worldly loss or inconvenience4 ,but is it possible that cowards1 in the cause of ,god1 should be found amongst the people of ,gideon1 who stood boldly against the idolatry of a whole city1 and overthrew the altar of ,baal1 or amongst the offspring of ,hananiah1 ,mishael1 and ,azariah1 who dared a fiery furnace1 or amidst the countrymen of ,daniel who trembled not at the view of the lion's den8 ,no1 we will rather believe that all the ,jews are still bigoted ,talmudists1 and that when they cease to be1 they will come forward with the spirit of their fathers and the strength of their ,god to vindicate the truth4 ,no4 ,,xxv4 ,,charms4 ,both ,jew and ,gentile will agree that true religion is the fear of the ,lord1 but the difficulty is how are we to know it1 and what are the marks that will help us to distinguish the true from the false8 ,the ,word of ,god gives many1 of which at present we select this one3-- 8,the fear of the ,lord is the beginning of wisdom40 7,psalm cxi4 #aj47 ,true religion1 as the ,bible teaches1 does not only better the heart1 but also improves the understanding2 whereas false religion not only corrupts1 but also makes its votaries foolish4 ,this is the uniform representation of the ,bible1 and thus we read of true religion1 8,the law of the ,lord is perfect1 converting the soul3 the testimony of the ,lord is sure1 making wise the simple40 7,psalm xix4 #g47 ,and again1 the wisest of men says1 8,then shalt thou understand righteousness1 judgment1 and equity2 yea1 every good path4 ,when wisdom entereth into thine heart1 and knowledge is pleasant to thy soul1 discretion shall preserve thee1 understanding shall keep thee40 7,prov4 ii4 #i-aa47 ,the votaries of false religion are1 on the contrary1 described as devoid of all wisdom4 8,they are altogether brutish and foolish2 the stock is a doctrine of vanities40 7,jer4 x4 #h47 ,and again1 8,none considereth in his heart1 neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say1 ,i have burned part of it in the fire2 yea1 also1 ,i have baked bread on the coals thereof2 ,i have roasted flesh and eaten it2 and shall ,i make the residue thereof an abomination8 ,shall ,i fall down to the stock of a tree8 ,he feedeth on ashes2 a deceived heart hath turned him aside1 that he cannot deliver his soul1 nor say1 ,is there not a lie in my right hand80 7,isaiah xliv4 #ai1 #bj47 ,according to these passages of ,scripture1 wisdom is a test of true religion1 and folly of a false one1 let us then apply this test to the religion of the oral law1 does it commend itself to the understanding by its wisdom1 and the wisdom of its teachers8 ,it is true1 that it speaks well of itself1 and calls all its doctors 8,wise men10 but the chapter on amulets1 quite fresh in the memory of our readers1 excites some doubts upon the subject1 though of these we consider only the theory4 ,the histories1 which the ,talmud gives of the ,rabbinical practice with regard to such charms1 lead to the inevitable conclusion that wisdom is not one of the characteristics of the oral law4 ,take for example the following direction to stop a bleeding at the nose3-- 8,for a bleeding at the nose1 let a man be brought who is a priest1 and whose name is ,levi1 and let him write the word ,levi backwards4 ,if this cannot be done1 get a layman1 and let him write the following words backwards3--#8,ana pipi ,shila bar ,sumki2'#bc or let him write these words1 #8,taam dli bemi keseph1 taam li bemi paggan2'#bd or let him take a root of grass1 and the cord of an old bed1 and paper and saffron1 and the red part of the inside of a palm tree1 and let him burn them together1 and let him take some wool1 and twist two threads1 and let him dip them in vinegar1 and then roll them in the ashes1 and put them into his nose4 ,or let him look out for a small stream of water that flows from east to west1 and let him go and stand with one leg on each side of it1 and let him take with his right hand some mud from under his left foot1 and with his left hand from under his right foot1 and let him twist two threads of wool1 and dip them in the mud1 and put them into his nostrils4 ,or let him be placed under a spout1 and let water be brought and poured upon him1 and let them say1 #8,as this water ceases to flow1 so let the blood of ,m41 the son of the woman ,n41 also cease4'0 7,gittin1 fol4 #fi1 col4 #a47 ,now we ask any ,jew of common sense1 whether this passage savours most of wisdom or folly8 ,vinegar and water may be very useful in such a case1 or even mud1 if used in sufficient quantity1 might stop up the nose1 and therefore stop the bleeding too1 but what manner of benefit can proceed from the word ,levi written backwards1 or from those words which ,rashi pronounces to be magical8 ,why is the mud of water flowing from east to west more efficacious1 and why is it to be taken with the right hand from under the left foot1 and with the left hand from under the right foot8 ,plainly because the authors of this passage thought there was some charm or magic power1 and their minds were so overpowered by superstition1 as to lead them to disregard the plain words of ,moses forbidding all magic4 ,it cannot be pretended that this is a rare case1 the ,talmud abounds in such remedies1 all equally wise4 ,for instance1 take the following mode of treatment for the scratch or bite of a mad dog3-- 1 1 1 8,the rabbies have handed down the tradition1 that there are five things to be observed of a mad dog3 his mouth is open1 his saliva flows1 his ears hang down1 his tail is between his legs1 and he goes by the sides of the ways4 ,some say also1 that he barks1 but his voice is not heard4 ,what is the cause of his madness8 ,rav says1 it proceeds from this1 that the witches are making their sport with him4 ,samuel says1 it is an evil spirit that rests upon him4 ,what is the difference8 ,the difference is this1 that in the latter case he is to be killed by some missile weapon4 ,the tradition#be agrees with ,samuel1 for it says1 ,in killing him no other mode is to be used but the casting of some missile weapon4 ,if a mad dog scratch any one1 he is in danger2 but if he bite him he will die4 ,in case of a scratch there is danger2 what then is the remedy8 ,let the man cast off his clothes and run away4 ,rav ,huna1 the son of ,rav ,joshua1 was once scratched in the street by one of them2 he immediately cast off his clothes and ran away4 ,he also says1 ,i fulfilled in myself those words1 #8,wisdom giveth life to them that have it4' 7,eccles4 vii4 #ab47 ,in case of a bite1 the man will die2 what then is the remedy8 ,abai says1 ,he must take the skin of a male adder1 and write upon it these words1 #8,i1 ,m41 the son of the woman ,n41 upon the skin of a male adder1 ,i write against thee1 ,kanti1 ,kanti1 ,klirus4' ,some say1 #8,kandi1 ,kandi1 ,klurus1 ,jah1 ,jah1 ,lord of ,hosts1 ,amen1 ,amen1 ,selah4' ,let him also cast off his clothes1 and bury them in the grave-yard for twelve months of the year2 then let him take them up and burn them in an oven1 and let him scatter the ashes at the parting of the roads4 ,but during these twelve months of the year1 when he drinks water1 let him drink out of nothing but a brass tube1 lest he should see the phantom-form of the demon and be endangered4 ,this was tried by ,abba1 the son of ,martha1 who is the same as ,abba1 the son of ,manjumi4 ,his mother made a golden tube for him40 7,joma1 fol4 #hc1 col4 #a47 ,this is a very plain case of the use of an amulet and of magic1 but whether it be a proof of profound wisdom we leave to the judgment of the reader4 ,what good can the poor man get from certain words written on the skin of a male adder8 or from first burying and then burning his clothes1 and scattering the ashes on the cross-roads8 ,it cannot be pretended that this is medical treatment1 and still less that it is the treatment commanded by the ,word of ,god4 ,if it had pleased ,god to command all this1 we should not only submit1 but gladly recommend this recipe in every similar case4 ,to ,god ,almighty no man can prescribe4 ,he chooses what means he pleases1 and may do so because his omnipotence can render them effectual4 ,he healed the ,israelites bitten by the fiery serpents by the sight of the brazen image1 and he cured ,naaman's leprosy by bathing in the waters of ,jordan4 ,whatever then be the means which ,he prescribes1 our highest wisdom is to make use of them4 ,but as he has not prescribed the means recommended by the ,talmud1 but forbidden them in his general prohibition of magic1 we must say that the man who uses them has bid adieu to all true wisdom4 ,no wonder1 then1 if his own inventions are stamped with folly4 ,but what will our readers think of the cause of the canine madness here assigned8 8,rav says1 ,it proceeds from the witches who are making their sport with him4 ,samuel says1 ,it is an evil spirit that rests upon him40 ,rav believed1 then1 that ,god1 whose mercies are over all his works1 allows wicked women to torment his creatures1 and to inflict upon them a dreadful malady to make sport for themselves4 ,is this wise1 is it according to ,scripture8 ,this is the doctrine of the oral law2 and if ,jesus of ,nazareth had not protested against it1 and taught a true doctrine by asserting the truth of ,scripture1 this would be the universal doctrine and practice of the ,jews4 ,whoever believes the ,talmud1 must believe in this and all the other follies which it contains4 ,whoever rejects these things1 confesses that the ,talmud contains what is false and foolish1 and thereby shakes or rather overthrows its authority4 ,some person will perhaps say that similar superstitions and follies have been found amongst ,christians4 ,we grant that this has been the case wherever ,christians have departed from the written ,word of ,god1 but can anything similar be found in the ,new ,testament8 ,that book is our standard of ,christianity4 ,as you say that the oral law is of divine authority1 we say that the ,new ,testament is of divine authority4 ,we point out to you these follies1 not in individual ,jews1 but in your book of authority4 ,if you would make out a parallel case1 you must do the same4 ,but you cannot4 ,the ,new ,testament has nothing of the kind2 and it is for you to explain how this happens that the ,new ,testament1 which you believe to be false1 is entirely free from every thing of the kind4 ,further1 we ask every right-minded ,israelite1 whether he is not shocked at that profanation of the reverend and holy names of ,god which is here not only countenanced but prescribed4 ,what can a devout ,jew think either of the man or the book that tells us to write the names1 8,jah1 ,jah1 the ,lord of ,hosts10 by the side of such nonsense as ,kanti1 ,kanti1 ,klurus8 ,would he say that this is consistent with true religion8 ,and yet this profane use of the name of ,god for magical purposes1 is not rare in the ,talmud4 ,the following is another instance3-- 1 1 1 8,rabbah says1 ,they that go down to the sea have told me1 that when a wave is going to overwhelm a ship1 sparks of white light are seen on its head4 ,but if we strike it with a staff on which are graved the words1 #8,i am that ,i am1 ,jah1 ,lord of ,hosts1 ,amen1 ,amen1 ,selah1' it subsides4 ,they that go down to the sea have told me1 that the distance between one wave and another1 is three hundred miles4 ,it happened once that we were making a voyage1 and we raised a wave until we saw the resting-place of the least of all the stars4 ,it was large enough to sow forty bushels of mustard seed1 and if we had raised it more we should have been burned by the vapour of the star4 ,one wave raised its voice and called to its companion1 ,o1 companion1 hast thou left anything in the world that thou hast not overflowed8 ,come1 and let us destroy it4 ,it replied1 ,come and see the power of thy ,lord4 ,i could not overpass the sand even a hair's-breadth1 for it is written1 #8,fear ye not me8 saith the ,lord3 will ye not tremble at my presence1 which have placed the sand for the bound of the sea1 by a perpetual decree that it cannot pass it8' 7,jer4 v4 #bb470 7,bava ,bathra1 fol4 #gc1 col4 #a47 ,here is the same profanation of the peculiar and holy names of ,god3 it is to be engraved on a staff either to lay or to raise the waves4 ,but besides the profanity1 just consider the folly of this whole story4 ,in the first place1 it ascribes to men1 no matter whether they are good or wicked1 absolute power over the waves of the sea4 ,anybody can engrave those names of ,god upon a staff1 anybody can use the staff to strike the sea1 and thus a wicked man1 without either faith1 fear1 or love of ,god1 may make and use an instrument which almost invests him with omnipotence4 ,is it possible that any son of ,israel can be so credulous as to believe such manifest absurdity8 ,but this story reminds us again of the utter disregard of truth which characterises the ,talmud4 ,here we are told that1 by power of this magic staff1 a wave was raised so high as to enable those travellers to see the resting-place of the smallest of all the stars1 and that so distinctly1 too1 as to be able to make a good guess at its measure4 ,the slightest knowledge of modern astronomy is sufficient to show not only the improbability1 but the utter impossibility of anything of the kind4 ,the least of the stars visible to the naked eye is at an almost immeasurable distance from the earth1 so as to make it perfectly ludicrous to talk of a wave being raised to such a height4 ,all the water on the face of the globe would be far from sufficient for the formation of one such wave4 ,but the ,talmud intimates that they had the power of raising it still higher1 and were prevented only by the fear of being scorched4 ,but the ,talmud is not satisfied with these wonders1 it goes on to describe a conversation between two waves4 ,the commentator1 who evidently believed every word of the story1 suggest that this conversation was carried on by the angels presiding over the waves4 1 8,the wave lifted up his voice1 that is1 it cried1 and so we find1 #8,deep calleth unto deep4' ,and perhaps this means the angels who were set over them40 ,the commentator1 it appears1 had no doubt of the truth of the story1 and how should he have1 if he believed in the ,divine authority of the ,talmud8 ,but we ask our readers do they believe this story--and if they do not1 why not8 ,because it is too absurd1 and too far beyond the bounds of possibility4 ,can1 then1 a book that swarms with similar accounts be from ,god8 ,by what means did all these things about magic1 astrology1 amulets1 magical cures1 and staves1 get into the ,talmud8 ,no doubt they were put in by the authors4 ,either1 then1 the authors believed in all these things1 or they did not4 ,if they did not believe in them1 then they were evidently bad men1 who deliberately wrote falsehood4 ,but if they did believe these things1 then1 though not guilty of wilful falsehood1 they were credulous1 superstitious persons1 who had no clear idea of the religion of ,moses and the prophets2 and in either case they are most unsafe guides in religion4 ,it is for the ,jews of the present day to consider whether they will still adhere to a system that involves the belief of so many incredibilities and sanctions the profanation of the names of ,god for the purposes of magic4 ,eighteen centuries are surely long enough to have remained in such thick darkness4 ,those who have been brought up in such a system ought now1 at least1 to arise and ask what have they and their forefathers been about all this while8 ,and how it is that the ,new ,testament1 which they have rejected1 is entirely free from such deformities8 ,something has been decidedly wrong1 or the chosen people of ,god could not have remained so long in captivity1 unheeded and unhelped by the ,holy ,one of ,israel4 ,an exhibition of the doctrines of the oral law explains the cause4 ,israel has departed from the religion of ,moses1 and pertinaciously adhered to a system compounded of human inventions1 and idolatrous heathenism4 ,they call ,moses their master1 and say that the oral law is derived from him1 but if we may from the work1 form a conjecture about the author1 it is much more probably a tradition from the magicians of ,egypt or the witch of ,endor4 ,and if it had been handed down as such--if the ,israelites had presented the ,talmud to the world and their posterity as part of the heavy yoke of ,egypt1 we should not have been astonished at the universality of its reception4 ,but that ,israel should ever have been so far imposed upon1 as to believe that ,moses or the prophets ever had anything to do with the oral law appears almost inexplicable4 ,however unwilling one may be to apply to fellow-sinners any prophecy that contains a denunciation of ,god's wrath1 one cannot help asking1 was it of this that the prophet said1 8,the ,lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep1 and hath closed your eyes2 the prophets and your rulers the seers hath he covered4 ,and the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed1 which men deliver to one that is learned1 saying1 read this1 ,i pray thee2 and he saith1 ,i cannot1 for it is sealed3 and the book is delivered to him that is not learned1 saying1 ,read this1 ,i pray thee1 and he saith1 ,i am not learned40 7,isaiah xxix4 #aj-ab47 ,this question is1 however1 far more important to ,israel than to us1 and to them we leave the answer4 ,some will still persist in the assertion that this heathenish compound is the highest wisdom4 ,the great majority of the nation is devoted to the ,talmud1 which is still the cistern whence the synagogues endeavour to draw the waters of life4 ,the multitude does it in ignorance1 they are1 therefore1 not so culpable4 ,but there are many that know better1 what then is the reason that they do not strain every nerve to deliver their brethren8 ,these few do not suffer the oral law to interfere either with their business or their convenience4 ,they profane the ,sabbath1 eat ,gentile food1 carry on their business on feasts and festivals4 ,if they do all this on principle1 why not protest against error8 ,is it because they are indifferent to the welfare of their brethren8 ,if indifference be the only fruit of this intellectual progress1 instead of rising above1 they have sunk below superstition itself4 ,footnote #bc3 ,the only explanation which ,rashi gives of these words is 8,it is a charm40 ,footnote #bd3 ,literally1 8,it is a charm40--,rashi4 ,footnote #be3 ,the ,bareitha4 ,no4 ,,xxvi4 ,,charms ,,continued4 ,if men would only employ in religion a little of that common sense and earnestness1 which they find so necessary for the affairs of this life1 they would by ,god's blessing soon arrive at the truth4 ,for example1 if the father of a family should find1 that by following the advice of a physician1 sickness and death were constant guests1 he would soon look out for another2 and he would be much quickened in his measures1 if this physician's counsel had produced the same results in the house of his father and his grandfather4 ,he would not think it any shame1 under such circumstances1 to change his father's physician for another2 on the contrary1 he would think1 and most men would agree with him1 that it would be both a sin and a shame to retain him4 ,now let ,israel make the application to their spiritual physicians1 the ,scribes1 ,pharisees1 and ,rabbies4 ,for many centuries they have punctually followed their advice1 and the consequence has been one misfortune after another1 and centuries of exile from the land which ,god gave to their fathers2 the very contrary of that which ,god has promised4 ,god has said1 if the ,jews will obey the religion of ,moses1 that they shall be restored to their land4 8,it shall come to pass 444 if thou shalt return unto the ,lord thy ,god1 and shalt obey his voice according to all that ,i command thee this day1 thou and thy children1 with all thy heart and with all thy soul2 that then the ,lord thy ,god will turn thy captivity1 and have compassion upon thee1 and will return and gather thee from all nations10 c4 7,deut4 xxx4 #b1 #c47 ,the ,jews have obeyed the commands of the rabbies1 and have not been gathered2 what is the conclusion8 ,either that ,god's promise has failed1 which is impossible1 or that the religion of the rabbies is not the religion of ,moses4 ,such is the inevitable conclusion from the words of ,moses and the facts of the case2 let it then lead the sufferers to examine the religion which they have hitherto professed4 ,a very little examination will convince any reasonable man1 that it is a fearful corruption of divine truth1 a compilation made by men who professed to be astrologers and magicians4 ,let not the ,jews think that our opinion is the result of prejudice4 ,it has been deliberately formed on evidence furnished by the oral law itself4 ,if we are wrong1 let the rabbies prove the contrary4 ,let them1 for example1 explain the following law of modern ,judaism4 8,if any person be bitten by a scorpion or a serpent1 it is lawful to charm the place of the bite1 even on the ,sabbath-day1 in order to quiet his mind1 and to encourage his heart1 although it is a thing utterly profitless4 ,because the man is in danger1 they have pronounced this lawful for him that his mind may not be distracted40 7,hilchoth ,accum4 c4 xi4 #aa47 ,here the rabbies have allowed what ,god has absolutely forbidden4 ,the men who profess such reverence for the ,sabbath allow it to be profaned by magic1 which is one of the works of the devil4 ,rambam1 whose words we have just quoted1 felt that it was both wicked and foolish1 and has therefore endeavoured to furnish an excuse1 saying that it is of no use1 and is only allowed to quiet the mind of the sufferer4 ,but that does not alter the unlawfulness4 ,besides1 what sort of opinion could ,rambam and the rabbies have had of the ,jews1 when they say that magic is permitted in order to quiet their minds8 ,they evidently supposed that the ,jews were a weak and superstitious people1 who believed so firmly in charms1 that the use of them would quiet the mind2 and so ignorant or careless about ,god's commandments1 that they could be comforted by their transgressions4 ,the excuse1 therefore1 only makes the case worse4 ,it takes for granted that the professors of the oral law are ignorant and superstitious2 and then to quiet their minds allows the transgression of the law of ,moses1 and that on the ,sabbath-day4 ,but this excuse is altogether ,rambam's invention4 ,the original passage in the ,talmud says nothing about quieting the man's mind1 it simply says-- 8,it is lawful to charm serpents and scorpions on the ,sabbath-day40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #aja1 col4 #a47 ,and ,rashi's commentary on the passage-- 8,that they may not do injury40 ,this man1 then1 who spent his life in the study of the ,talmud1 knew nothing of ,rambam's apology4 ,he plainly believed that by charming serpents on the ,sabbath1 they might be prevented from doing harm1 and that on this account1 and not for the purpose of quieting the mind1 they were permitted so to do4 ,this was also the opinion of that famous expounder of ,jewish law1 the ,baal ,turim1 for after quoting ,rambam's words1 he adds3-- 1 8,if any person be pursued by a serpent or a scorpion1 it is lawful to charm it to prevent it from doing injury4 ,rambam has written1 ,he that charms a wound1 or reads a verse from the law 7as a charm71 and also he that reads over an infant that it may not be afraid1 or who lays a roll of the law or phylacteries upon a child1 are not only to be accounted as one of the charmers and magicians1 but as of the deniers of the law1 for they use the words of the law as medicine for the body1 whereas it is only a medicine for the soul4 ,r4 ,isaac says absolutely1 that he who charms a wound1 mentioning at the same time the name of ,god and spitting1 is the charmer of whom it is said that he has no share in the world to come3 but if he does not spit1 the matter is not so grave4 ,it is1 however1 forbidden to use a verse as a charm over a wound1 even though there will be no spitting nor mentioning the name of ,god4 ,but if life be in danger1 every thing is lawful2 and it is lawful to read a verse as a defence1 for instance at night in bed40 7,joreh ,deah4 #agi47 ,from this it is pretty plain that the charming of serpents was allowed1 not as ,rambam says to quiet the mind of him that had been bitten1 but to prevent injury1 for it is allowed before the man is bitten at all1 if he be only pursued by a serpent or a scorpion4 ,but what a picture does this whole passage give us of the religious state of the ,rabbinic ,jews1 both rabbies and people4 ,here you have the people described1 not by ,christians1 but by the rabbies themselves1 as sunk in the depths of superstition1 using a sepher torah1 a roll of the law1 or phylacteries as a sort of charm for the benefit of children1 and you have the rabbies forbidding this at one time1 but allowing what is equally forbidden by ,god1 to charm serpents3 and1 in case of danger1 declaring that 8,every thing is lawful10 that is1 allowing them to do what will make them1 according to ,rambam's opinion1 charmers1 magicians1 and deniers of the law4 ,and this is the ,jewish religion1 and this is what the ,jews have gained by rejecting ,christianity4 ,we1 poor ,gentiles1 who cannot trace our pedigree to ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 should be ashamed of such follies4 ,and if such wicked heathenish practices were to be found in our religious books1 we would not let an hour pass over until we had lifted up our voice and protested against them1 and should use every lawful means to deliver our children from such ungodliness and error4 ,we have now given quotations from the two great digests of ,jewish law on the subject of using charms1 but it is worth while to consider the context of the original passage1 upon which these laws are based1 as that will prove that the ,talmud has not been misrepresented by its compilers4 8,our rabbies have handed down the tradition that it is lawful to anoint and rub the stomach 7of a sick man7 on the ,sabbath1 also to charm serpents and scorpions on the ,sabbath3 also to pass an instrument across the eye on the ,sabbath4 ,r4 ,simeon1 the son of ,gamaliel1 says1 that this only applies to an instrument which may be moved1#bf but with one that may not be moved1 it is unlawful4 ,but it is unlawful on the ,sabbath to make inquiry of demons4 ,r4 ,jose says1 this is also unlawful on week-days4 ,rav ,huna says1 the decision is not according to ,r4 ,jose3 and ,r4 ,jose himself said this only on account of danger1 for that is what occurred in the case of ,r4 ,isaac1 the son of ,joseph1 who was swallowed up in a cedar tree1 but a miracle was wrought for him--the cedar opened and cast him out40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #aja1 col4 #a47 ,we have here1 first1 the charming of serpents2 we ask1 then1 could the ,talmudic doctors really believe in such folly or allow such wickedness on the ,sabbath8 ,is there any misunderstanding1 or does the context show1 that they were men of that superstitious turn of mind to justify this idea8 ,the context is all of a piece1 for after permitting the charming of serpents1 it goes on to discuss the lawfulness of asking counsel of demons1 and here ,rashi shall explain what this means3-- 8,to make inquiry of demons1 is what they do when any thing is lost4 ,they make inquiry by the work of demons1 and they tell them1 and this is forbidden on the ,sabbath1 on account of the words1 #8,not finding thine own pleasure4' 7,isaiah lviii4 #ac470 ,this is plainly a magical operation1 but yet the rabbies do not say that it is unlawful because it is magical1 but because it would be attending to one's own concerns4 ,in like manner1 they say1 it is unlawful on week-days1 only on account of the danger4 ,and an instance is given in ,rabbi ,isaac of what might happen2 and here1 again1 we ask counsel of ,rashi1 in order to understand what ,rabbi ,isaac was about4 ,this commentator tells us3-- 8,he was asking counsel1 by means of a demoniacal operation1 and the demon sought to do him an injury1 but a miracle was wrought for him1 and a cedar tree swallowed him40 ,such1 then1 is the context1 those men who permit the charming of serpents1 also teach the doctrine of asking advice of demons1 and give us a practical example in one of their friends4 ,there can1 therefore1 be no mistake2 the one feature of their religious system exactly agrees with the other3 and the authors of the oral law represent themselves as patrons and practisers of charms and magic1 and therefore to every lover of the ,mosaic law1 as unwise and ungodly men4 ,it is1 however1 curious to see how they endeavoured to quiet their own conscience1 and that of the people1 in a matter so evidently repugnant to the plain words of ,scripture4 ,they pretended1 that there was a holy sort of magic in the practical ,cabbala1 which men might learn1 and then perform the greatest miracles4 8,if the righteous wished1 they might create the world1 for it is written1 #8,but your sins separate1 c4' ,rabba created a man1 and sent him to ,rabbi ,zira4 ,he spoke with him1 but when the other did not answer him1 he said1 ,thou art from the magicians1 return to thy dust4 ,rav ,chanina and ,rav ,oshaia used to sit every ,sabbath eve and study the book of ,jetzirah1 and then created for themselves a three-years-old calf1 and ate it40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #fe1 col4 #b47 ,the second miracle is here ascribed to the study of a certain book4 ,in ,rashi the first miracle performed by ,rabba is ascribed to the same source4 8,he created the man by means of the book of ,jetzirah1 for it taught him the combination of the letters of the name of ,god40 ,according to this account1 these rabbies were much greater men than ,moses or any of the prophets1 for in the whole ,old ,testament there is not one such miracle recorded4 ,moses never created any thing1 neither did he perform any of his miracles without the help of ,god4 ,either the ,lord immediately commanded him1 or he sought the ,lord's help4 ,but these rabbies acquired the power of omnipotence by studying a particular book1 and exercised it either for their amusement or their profit4 ,rabba created a man1 and sent him to ,rabbi ,zira1 not as it appears to do any good1 or to glorify ,god1 but simply to show his power1 or to act a little bit of waggery2 and the other two created a fat calf for themselves every ,sabbath eve1 that they might have a good dinner4 ,the difference between these miracles and those recorded in ,scripture is obvious4 ,the ,scripture miracles are either for the glory of ,god1 or the good of man4 ,the rabbinical miracles are altogether for the glory of man1 and the gratification of self4 ,moses smote the rock1 and supplied all ,israel with water4 ,the rabbies create a calf1 and eat it themselves4 ,no doubt there were many poor people in ,israel at the time of ,rabbies ,oshaia and ,chanina1 who would have been very glad of a calf for their ,sabbath dinner1 why did they not create a calf or two for them8 ,this selfish falsehood betrays itself1 and bears on its front its own condemnation4 ,the whole doctrine of the combination of the letters in the name of ,god is a pure invention of men1 whose minds have been debased by superstition4 ,there is not a word about it in the whole ,bible1 and it is derogatory to the honour of ,god1 who is the only ,creator4 ,the whole ,talmudic doctrine of magic does1 however1 explain the reason why the ,scribes and ,pharisees were so little moved by the real miracles of ,jesus of ,nazareth and his disciples4 ,their minds were fully possessed with faith in the power of cabalistic magic1 they therefore were insensible to the real displays of divine power4 ,they were in the same state of mind as ,pharaoh and his magicians1 who looked on the miracles of ,moses as a mere proof of magical skill1 and hardened their hearts4 ,even when they confessed 8,this is the finger of ,god10 they were not converted4 ,pharaoh still persisted in his resistance4 ,and so it was with the ,scribes and ,pharisees4 ,when the ,lord had raised ,lazarus from the dead1 8then gathered the chief priests and the ,pharisees in council1 and said1 ,what do we8 for this man doeth many miracles40 ,they acknowledged the fact of the miracles1 but did not receive their evidence1 for they believed that the study of the book of ,jetzirah would enable them to do greater4 ,no miracle1 therefore1 could convince them4 ,but besides this1 their hearts were corrupt1 and they had apostatized from the law of ,moses2 they therefore did not love the truth4 ,they had turned aside to charms and magic1 and asking counsel of demons2 and when men do this1 the understanding becomes darkened1 so that it is rendered impervious to the light4 ,their unbelief1 therefore1 becomes an evidence to the truth of ,christianity4 ,if such transgressors of the law of ,moses1 and such unblushing relaters of falsehood had believed1 it would have cast a shade of suspicion over the whole ,gospel history4 ,if the men1 who say that ,rabba created a man1 and the two other worthies created a calf every week1 had appeared as witnesses for the truth of ,christianity1 the miracles of the ,gospel would have appeared in one category with these most absurd fictions4 ,but when such men appear as the enemies and persecutors of ,jesus1 it testifies that ,he was not one of them1 and that as they were bad men1 and loved a false system1 his doctrine must necessarily have had something good in it1 or they would not have opposed it4 ,but this doctrine explains still more clearly the cause of ,god's wrath against ,israel4 ,the ,jews boast that since the ,babylonian captivity1 they have been free from idolatry1 but this is not true4 ,they have not made images1 that is1 they have avoided the form1 but they have retained all the substance of idolatrous heathenism4 ,the man who charms a serpent is an idolater1 and the religion which permits it is idolatrous and heathenish4 ,the man who asks counsel of demons is an idolater of the worst class1 for he does homage to unclean spirits4 ,he turns his back upon the allwise ,god1 who ought to be the counsellor of all his children1 and by making demons his advisers1 makes them his gods1 and yet this is also allowed in the religion of the rabbies if it can be done without danger4 ,those ,jews1 therefore1 who believe in the oral law--that is1 all ,jews who make use of the synagogue prayers1 have departed from the law and the ,god of ,moses1 and have chosen for themselves the doctrines and the gods of the rabbies4 ,how then can ,god have compassion upon them and gather them8 ,the thing is impossible1 until they utterly renounce all these delusions1 confess their sin in having followed them so long1 and 8return and seek the ,lord their ,god and ,david their king40 ,a long trial has been made of the rabbinical medicine1 and it has altogether failed4 ,wherever the religion of the oral law has been or is predominant1 its sway has been marked by the misery of the people4 ,and the first dawn of a happier day has appeared only since the time that a part of the nation burst the fetters of rabbinic superstition4 ,compare the state of the ,german ,jews with that of their brethren in ,turkey or on the coast of ,morocco4 ,some of the former have abandoned the oral law1 and the latter still cling to it with a bigoted devotion2 and yet the former have had a blessing in the improvement of their temporal and intellectual condition1 and the latter still remain in mental and corporeal slavery4 ,the mere renunciation of ,rabbinism has produced these beneficial effects1 and if the ,jews of ,europe go on from the renunciation of error to the attainment of truth1 that is1 if they return to the religion of ,moses and the prophets1 the promises of ,god will be fulfilled1 and the nation will be restored to the land of their fathers4 ,the ,rabbinic ,jews comfort themselves with the idea1 that they cannot have this world and the world to come too2 but they confound two things which are perfectly distinct1 ,god's mode of dealing with individuals1 and his mode of dealing with nations4 ,individuals have not only an existence in time1 but for eternity4 ,worldly misfortune to an individual is1 therefore1 no proof of ,god's displeasure1 because the world is only a part1 and that the smallest part1 of his existence4 ,but the case of nations is different4 ,they exist only in time1 and therefore the rewards and punishments must be temporal1 and so ,god has uniformly promised to the ,jewish people temporal prosperity1 in case of national obedience1 and temporal calamity in the former case4 ,whenever1 therefore1 we see ,israel exiled from their land and scattered among the nations1 we must infer1 if ,moses has spoken the truth1 that it is because they have departed from the ,god of their fathers4 ,footnote #bf3 ,such as a key1 a ring1 or a knife4--,rashi4 ,no4 ,,xxvii4 ,,sabbatic ,,laws4 ,how little the oral law has hitherto done to promote the peace and happiness of ,israel1 we considered in our last number4 ,it may1 however1 be replied1 that it has not had a fair trial1 and that the failure is to be attributed rather to the people than to the law4 ,this possible reply naturally leads us to think1 what then would be the state of ,israel and of the world at large1 if the oral law were universally and exactly observed1 and its disciples had supreme dominion in the world8 ,suppose that all the kingdoms of the world were melted into one vast and universal monarchy1 and the sceptre swayed by a devout and learned rabbi1 and all the magisterial offices filled by able and zealous ,talmudists1 would the world be happy8 ,this is a fair question1 and well deserves consideration1 for there can be no doubt that true religion was intended by its ,divine ,author to promote the happiness of his creatures3-- 8,her ways are ways of pleasantness1 and all her paths are peace40 7,prov4 iii4 #ag47 ,and that not of a few1 but of all without exception4 1 8,have we not all one father8 ,hath not one ,god created us80 7,mal4 ii4 #aj47 ,that religion1 therefore1 cannot be of ,god1 which would make the greatest portion of his creatures miserable1 and confer happiness on a very limited number4 ,the religion that came from heaven1 wherever it exists1 must contain the elements of happiness for all nations1 and include all the families of man4 ,it must exclude none but the wilfully and obstinately wicked1 who carry the torments of hell in their own bosom1 and would be necessarily unhappy even in heaven itself4 ,a religion1 whose principles1 if triumphant1 would effect so desirable a consummation1 must be true4 ,the question is1 whether modern ,judaism1 if it had full and free scope for the realization of all its principles1 would bear such blessed fruit8 ,our late inquiries about amulets and magic led us to consider some of the laws about the ,sabbath-day1 and as when true religion prevails1 this ought to be the happiest day of the week1 the laws respecting it shall furnish materials for our answer4 ,that a rabbinical ,sabbath would be the happiest day in the week we much doubt1 for1 in the first place1 to keep the rabbinical ,sabbath aright1 it is necessary to be perfectly acquainted with all the laws relating to it1 which are very many and very intricate1 occupying even in ,rambam's compendium1 including the notes1 above one hundred and seventy folio pages4#bg ,that any conscientious man can be happy with such a load of law about his neck appears impossible4 ,he must be in continual fear and trembling lest he should through forgetfulness or inadvertence be guilty of transgression1 and the continued watchfulness and anxiety would be more intolerable than the hardest labour4 ,but if ,rabbinism wielded the supreme power1 he would have to dread the most severe and immediate punishment3-- 1 1 8,to rest on the seventh day from work is an affirmative precept1 for it is said1 #8,on the seventh day thou shalt rest4' ,whosoever1 therefore1 does any work1 annuls an affirmative1 and transgresses a negative precept1 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt do no manner of work4' ,what is meant by being guilty on account of doing work8 ,if it be done voluntarily and presumptuously1 the meaning is1 that he is liable to excision1 and if there were witnesses and a warning1 he is to be stoned4 ,if he did it in error1 he must bring a certain sin-offering40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 i4 #a47 ,this sounds something like the law of ,moses1 but is in reality far more severe4 ,the whole force depends upon the meaning of the word 8work10 and the rabbinical sense would entirely destroy the peace of society4 ,if1 for instance1 a poor man could not afford to have his ,sabbath lamp burn all day1 and should extinguish it to save the oil2 or if a humane man should see burning coals in some place likely to do injury to others1 and should extinguish them1 they would both be guilty1 and if some zealous ,talmudists happened to be present1 and first remonstrated with them on the unlawfulness of the act1 they would both be tried1 found guilty1 and stoned to death3-- 1 1 8,whosoever does any work on the ,sabbath1 even though he does not do it for the sake of the work itself1 is nevertheless guilty4 ,how so8 ,if1 for instance1 a man extinguishes a lamp1 because he wants the oil or the wick1 and wishes that it should not waste1 nor be burned1 or that the earthenware part of the lamp should not be cracked2 inasmuch as the extinguishing is work1 and his intention was to extinguish it3 although the mere act of extinguishing it was not the ultimate object1 but on the contrary1 the saving of the oil or the wick1 or the earthen lamp1 he is1 nevertheless1 guilty4 ,and in like manner1 whosoever1 removes thorns a distance of four ells in a public place1 or whosoever extinguishes coals to prevent the public from being injured1 is guilty3 although the ultimate object was not the extinguishing nor the moving1 but he simply intended to prevent the injury1 he is guilty1 and so in all similar cases40 7,ibid47 ,if this were the law of the land1 and the executive were in the hands of ,talmudistic zealots1 the peace of the world would be at an end4 ,the poor man could not be happy1 when he saw his little property wasting2 and the humane man would either be made miserable at the thought of being able to prevent much injury1 and yet not doing it1 or would have to expose himself to the danger of a cruel and ignominious death4 ,we know enough of the general character of the ,jewish nation to believe that there are amongst them those who would brave the danger1 whose generous hearts would rise above personal considerations1 but how dreadful would be the consequences6 ,a man of a tender heart1 the father of a family1 would be induced1 by the best of feelings1 to save his fellow-men from injury4 ,he would return to his family1 and tell them how ,god had given him an opportunity of doing good4 ,the family worthy of such a father would rejoice to hear the information1 but the sequel of his story would turn their joy into mourning4 ,he would have to tell them that ignominious death would be the consequence1 and that because he dared to do an act of charity1 and to love his brother as himself1 the morrow would see his wife a widow and his children orphans4 ,but suppose1 that when he performed the act1 he had been attended by two of his sons1 now grown up1 and zealots for the oral law--that they had warned him1 and then became his accusers1 as they must1 if firm believers in ,talmudic religion1 he would have the additional pangs of seeing his own flesh and blood as the foremost of his executioners4 ,this one law would clothe the world with mourning1 and make the light of the ,sabbath sun the curse of mankind4 ,though men might be found at first to brave the danger1 the course of time and the inflexible severity of the law would soon annihilate all generous feeling4 ,children would be trained up with the idea that humanity is not a ,sabbath virtue1 and the constant resistance of the tender feelings would harden the heart1 and mankind in time become totally insensible on week-days as well as ,sabbath-days2 and thus the enforcement of this one law would produce universal selfishness1 and this would certainly not promote the happiness of the world4 ,but take another case of a man1 who leaves his home on the ,friday morning to go a short distance into the country1 intending to return before the commencement of the ,sabbath2 he meets with an accident1 and breaks a limb2 on the ,sabbath he is sufficiently restored to think of the anxiety of his family1 and writes a short note to inform them of his state1 this act of common love and kindness would cost him his life2 nay1 if he had only begun the letter1 and then overcome by fear or weakness1 had left it unfinished1 a rabbinic tribunal would condemn him to be stoned4 1 8,whosoever intends to do any work on the ,sabbath1 and begins it1 and does a certain measure1 is guilty1 although he does not finish all that he intended4 ,how so8 ,suppose he intended to write a letter1 or a contract on the ,sabbath1 it is not to be thought that he will not be guilty until he finish his business1 and write the whole contract or the whole letter4 ,on the contrary1 as soon as he shall have written two letters 7of the alphabet7 he is guilty40 7,ibid47 ,and consequently1 if it can be proved1 must be stoned4 ,every one's daily experience will tell them of the many similar cases where a letter may be necessary for the peace or well-being of an individual or a family1 and where the delay of a day would be a serious injury4 ,if rabbinism held the reins of power1 the anxiety1 the sorrow1 the injury must all be endured2 the ,sabbath-day must be made a burden and a curse1 instead of a blessing1 or life itself must be exposed to danger4 ,but this would not be the only misery4 ,these sanguinary laws would1 as religious laws1 bind the consciences of the weak and superstitious4 ,a man's domestics1 or his children1 or even his wife1 would become spies over all his ,sabbath doings1 and the denouncers of every transgression2 and thus domestic confidence1 without which not even the shadow of happiness can exist1 would be destroyed1 and a man's foes would be those of his own household4 ,much has lately been thought and said about the sanguinary nature of the laws of ,england1 but the laws of ,draco himself were merciful when compared with the religious enactments of the rabbies4 ,draco only sentenced to death men convicted of a crime4 ,the oral law condemns to stoning the man1 woman1 or child who will venture to write two letters of the alphabet1 or even who will extinguish fire to prevent a public injury4 ,nay1 in some cases1 where it actually pronounces a man innocent1 it nevertheless commands him to be flogged4 8,if a man intended to gather black figs1 but gathered white figs1 or if he intended to gather figs and afterwards grapes1 but the matter has been inverted1 and he gathered the grapes first1 and afterwards the figs1 he is not guilty4 ,although he have gathered all that he thought of gathering1 yet1 because he did not gather them in the intended order1 he is not guilty1 for he did what was unintentional1 and the law forbids only intentional work40 7,ibid47 ,we pass by the manifest absurdity of this decision1 which is1 however1 sufficient to prove that this law is not of ,god1 because it is more important to consider what is to be done with a man not guilty4 ,the law of ,england1 or any other civilized country1 would say1 of course1 that he is to go free2 but not so the oral law1 it commands that the man should be flogged4 1 8,wherever it is said1 he that doeth anything is not guilty1 the meaning is1 that he is not liable to excision1 nor stoning1 nor a sacrifice1 but that thing is unlawful to be done1 and the prohibition is of the words of the ,scribes1 and is intended as a removal from the possibility of work3 and he that does it presumptuously1 is to be flogged with the flogging of rebellion40 7,ibid47 ,here1 then1 we have a whole class of crimes which the oral law itself allows are no crimes according to the law of ,moses1 but which it thinks fit to punish with that dreadful and degrading infliction4 ,are the professors of this traditional religion really acquainted with its ordinances8 or can any man believe that a religion which1 if it had full scope and power1 would become the torment of the human race1 can emanate from ,god8 ,if ever this religion attains supreme power1 its adherents will be reduced to a state of the most deplorable bondage1 but what would be its effect upon the other nations of the world8 ,it would1 in the first place1 deprive all other nations of a ,sabbath2 for we have already quoted the law 7,no4 #c1 p4 #bb71 which decides1 8,that a ,gentile who keeps a ,sabbath1 though it be on one of the week-days is guilty of death10 and though not to be executed1 is yet to be flogged4 ,this would be a very serious diminution from the happiness of millions of human beings4 ,the ,gentile--who1 like the ,jew1 must earn his bread by the sweat of his brow1 and devote six days to the concerns of the world--requires a day of rest from secular labours1 and cares1 and thoughts1 to relieve his body and to refresh his soul1 and hold communion with his ,god4 ,of this the oral law would deprive him1 or1 if his conscience compelled him to sanctify one day in seven1 he would have to purchase his spiritual enjoyment by corporeal suffering4 ,many would1 no doubt1 be terrified at the thought of the punishment1 and all trace of a ,sabbath would in time cease amongst the ,gentiles4 ,the multitude would soon be left destitute of religious instruction1 and general vice and misery be the consequence4 ,this religion1 then1 of the oral law1 would certainly not promote the happiness of the ,gentiles1 and they are the overwhelming majority of mankind3 it therefore cannot be of ,god4 ,but the violent deprivation of a holy day of rest would be far from producing kindly feelings towards the ,jews4 ,mankind would rebel against such oppression2 and the religion which commanded it instead of obtaining their reverence1 as it ought to do if true1 would become their detestation4 ,this unhappy feeling would be increased by other similar laws1 equally wanting in charity4 ,for instance-- 8,a ,gentile woman is not to be delivered upon the ,sabbath1 not even for payment1 neither is the enmity to be regarded4 ,it is not to be done1 even though no profanation of the ,sabbath should be implied4 ,but the daughter of a sojourning proselyte may be delivered1 for we are commanded to preserve the life of such1 but the ,sabbath is not to be profaned on her account40 7,ibid4 chap4 ii4 #ab47 ,we ask every ,jew who has got the heart of a man1 whether such a law can be from ,god8 or whether the religion of which it forms a part can be true8 ,a poor woman1 in the hour of her extremity1 is to be left to her fate1 simply because she is an idolatress4 ,the mother and the child are both to be left to perish1 because1 either through her own fault1 or through the circumstances of her birth1 she has remained ignorant of the true ,god4 ,but grant1 for the sake of argument1 that the mother is so hardened a sinner as to be beyond the mercies of sinful men1 what has the child done1 that its life is to be given as a sport to chance8 ,is that the way to convert a sinner from the error of her ways1 or to recommend the true religion8 ,the most besotted of idolaters1 who believes at all in a ,divine and merciful being1 would pronounce such religion false4 ,a few such cases would soon spread through the world1 and ,judaism become the aversion of every heart that can sympathize with suffering4 ,and thus1 if true1 it would confirm all mankind in error4 ,but it cannot be3 the religion that comes from ,god bears the impress of its author1 and teaches such love and kindness that the practice of it softens1 where it does not convert4 ,its bitterest enemies must confess that its practical principles are worthy of all admiration4 ,but there is here a second case1 the daughter of a sojourning proselyte1 towards whom the oral law is a little more lenient1 it allows such an one to be delivered1 but does not permit the ,sabbath to be profaned on her account4 ,suppose then that such an one found herself in the midst of ,jews1 and after her delivery required the comfort of a fire or warm food for herself or her infant1 or any other assistance that would imply a breach of the ,sabbath1 it could not be done1 but for an ,israelitess it may be done2 can this proceed from ,him who seeks the happiness of all his creatures8 ,it cannot be said that this is a rare case1 for it is easy to show that this is the general spirit of the oral law3-- 1 1 1 1 8,if ,gentiles and ,israelites live together in one court1 even if there be only one ,israelite and a thousand ,gentiles1 and a ruin fall on one of them1 the rubbish is to be cleared away1 on account of the ,israelite4 ,if one of them had gone by himself to another court1 and that court fell upon him1 the rubbish is also to be cleared away1 for perhaps this one was the ,israelite1 and the rest were ,gentiles4 ,but if they all set out to go from this court to another court1 and during the time of their moving1 one of them separated and went to another court1 and a ruin fell upon him1 and it is not known who he is1 the rubbish is not to be cleared away4 ,for as they all moved together1 it is certain that the ,israelite was not amongst them2 and every one who separated from them1 whilst going1 is to be reckoned as belonging to the majority40 7,ibid4 #bj1 #ba47 ,here the same utter recklessness of ,gentile life or comfort is displayed1 and no one will pretend that such laws1 if carried into effect1 would promote the happiness of mankind4 ,accidents1 like births1 happen on the ,jewish ,sabbath as well as on the other days1 but if the oral law had power1 the ,gentiles to whom any accident happened1 might wait until the ,sabbath was over1 and must thus lose the only comfort which is possible on such an occasion4 ,when a man is suffering from severe bodily injury1 there are but two sources of consolation2 the one is the kind and benevolent attentions of man1 the other the remembrance of ,god's mercy and goodness1 but the oral law cuts off both from the suffering ,gentile4 ,it forbids its disciples to help him1 and says at the same time that this is the law of ,god4 ,but could the ,jews themselves be happy on that ,sabbath1 where such an accident occurred1 and where they had left a poor ,gentile buried under the ruins of a building8 ,could they enjoy peace in the bosom of their family1 or could they find holy pleasure in the prayers of the synagogue when they had left one of ,god's creatures1 a fellow-man1 to perish in his misery8 ,but this law would affect more than the individual sufferer1 and the few surrounding spectators4 ,it would prevent all brotherly love between ,jews and ,gentiles1 and until all men learn the reality of charity1 the world cannot be happy4 ,if it be true that the religion given by ,god1 wherever it is carried into practice1 makes men happy1 then the religion of the oral law cannot be true1 for1 if practised1 it would make1 all men miserable4 ,footnote #bg3 ,hilchoth ,shabbath and ,hilchoth ,eruvin extend from fol4 #adj to fol4 #bbf4 ,no4 ,,xxviii4 ,,fast ,,for ,,the ,,destruction ,,of ,,the ,,temple4 ,all who believe the ,bible look forward1 in full assurance of hope1 to that happy period1 when ,israel shall be gathered from the four corners of the earth1 and restored to the land of their forefathers and the favour of their ,god4 ,the days of their mourning shall then be ended1 and their fasts1 now observed on account of the misfortunes of the nation1 shall be turned into joy and gladness3-- 8,thus saith the ,lord of hosts1 the fast of the fourth month1 and the fast of the fifth1 and the fast of the seventh1 and the fast of the tenth1 shall be to the house of ,judah joy and gladness1 and cheerful feasts3 therefore love the truth and peace40 7,zech4 viii4 #ai47 ,at that time1 the prophet goes on to tell us1 ,jerusalem shall be the metropolis of the world1 and the common centre to which all the nations of the earth shall flow 8to seek the ,lord of hosts and to pray before him40 ,we ,christians believe this as fully1 and long for the happy accomplishment as ardently as the ,jews4 ,it would give us unspeakable pleasure to behold the ,jews on that height of moral dignity and glory for which ,god destined them1 from the first hour that he chose their father ,abraham to be ,his friend4 ,we desire the arrival of this happy period1 for the sake of the ,jews themselves1 but surely no ,jew will feel offended with us if we say that we desire it also for our own sakes and for the sake of all the families of men4 ,we should wish to see ,divine truth triumphant1 sin and misery banished1 and brotherly love universal1 but we see all these things connected with the restoration of ,israel1 and the establishment of the kingdom of ,god upon earth1 and therefore we join with all our heart in the the most ardent aspirations of the ,jewish people1 and say1 8,amen0 to every prayer that ,god 8would remember his covenant with ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 and that he would also remember the land40 ,but1 alas6 these prayers and wishes and anticipations all remind us that that happy day is still future4 ,israel is still scattered among the nations1 and instead of having days of joy and gladness1 is about to observe another solemn day of mourning in remembrance of the desolation of their city and temple4 ,the ninth of the month of ,av is still a fast1 and ,rambam thus describes the causes of mourning on that day3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,on the ninth of ,av five things happened4 ,it was decreed in the wilderness that ,israel should not enter into the land4 ,the temple was destroyed1 both the first and second time4 ,the great city named ,bither was taken1 and there were in it thousands and tens of thousands of ,israel1 and they had a great king1 whom all ,israel and the greatest of the wise men imagined to be the ,king ,messiah4 ,but he fell into the hands of the ,gentiles1 and the ,israelites were all slain1 and there was a great affliction similar to the desolation of the temple4 ,on this same day1 destined for punishment1 the wicked ,turnus ,rufus ploughed up the sanctuary and the adjacent parts1 to fulfil that which is said1 #8,zion shall be ploughed as a field4' 7,mich4 iii4 #ab470 7,hilchoth ,taanioth1 c4 v47 ,the mere enumeration of all these dreadful inflictions of the ,almighty suggest many and grave topics for reflection1 but the most important of all is1 the cause of the last desolation of the temple1 and the present long captivity4 ,to mourn over past misfortunes and to humble ourselves for past sins1 is indeed good and wholesome2 but if it does not teach us how to remedy the one and to avoid the other1 it can only terminate in despair4 ,every ,israelite1 therefore1 who weeps for the desolation of the holy and beautiful house where his fathers worshipped1 should also set himself earnestly to inquire into the cause and remedy of this great calamity4 ,why was it that the ,god of mercy desolated his own house1 the only temple that ,he had in the world built by his own express command8 ,the idolatry of the nation was the cause of the destruction of the first temple4 1 1 1 1 444 8,moreover1 all the chief of the priests1 and the people1 transgressed very much1 after all the abominations of the heathen1 and polluted the house of the ,lord which he had hallowed in ,jerusalem4 ,and the ,lord ,god of their fathers sent to them by his messengers1 rising up betimes and sending2 because he had compassion on his people1 and on his dwelling-place3 but they mocked the messengers of ,god1 and despised his words1 and misused his prophets1 until the wrath of the ,lord arose against his people1 till there was no remedy4 ,therefore he brought upon them the ,king of the ,chaldeans1 who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary1 and had no compassion upon young man or maiden1 old man or him that stooped for age3 he gave them all into his hand--and they burned the house of ,god and broke down the wall of ,jerusalem1 and burned all the palaces thereof with fire1 and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof40 7#b ,chron4 ,,xxxvi4 #ad-ai47 ,here1 then1 obstinate idolatry is represented as the cause of the first desolation4 ,israel learned and practised the abominations of the heathen1 and thus polluted the temple1 and therefore ,god destroyed the temple and sent them into captivity4 ,there were no doubt many and other great sins in ,israel1 but they are not mentioned1 as if to show that nothing short of wilful and obstinate departure from ,god could have led him to adopt so severe a measure4 ,as long as they retained their allegiance to ,god and rejected the abominations of the heathen1 there was a hope and a possibility that they might repent of other sins1 but when men obstinately turn away from ,god1 and will not hearken to his warnings1 all hope of repentance is at an end1 and there is no alternative but just judgment4 ,but was this the case in the second temple8 ,were the ,jews then obstinate idolaters8 ,had they images amongst them1 and did they pollute the second temple with such abominations of the heathen8 ,no1 rather than bow down to images1 they willingly endured every torture1 and offered up even their lives as a sacrifice to the truth1 and when the second temple was destroyed1 there was not amongst ,israel a single vestige of idolatry4 ,never1 in the whole course of their history1 from the going forth out of ,egypt to that day1 was there such an apparently scrupulous observation of the letter of the law1 and never had ,israel had so many learned men devoted to the study of the commandments4 ,what then could be the cause of the second desolation8 ,it was not idolatry1 but it must have been something equally odious in the sight of ,god1 and it must have been a sin committed equally by the priests and the people4 ,you observe that in the above description of the first destruction1 it is said1 8,all the chief of the priests1 and the people transgressed very much40 ,if the priests had remained faithful to their ,god1 ,he would not have destroyed their temple1 for there would have been hope1 that1 by their exertions and teaching1 the people might be brought to a better mind4 ,or1 if the people had remained faithful1 ,god would not have punished the people for the sins of the priests2 he would have cut off the wicked priests and raised up others according to his own heart4 ,nothing short of the unanimous wickedness of priests and people could have brought on so great a calamity4 ,in like manner we infer that the cause of the second destruction was not any partial wickedness1 but some sin1 of which both priests and people were guilty1 that drew down that calamity4 ,and1 further1 it must have been a sin against which they were warned by special messengers of ,god4 ,when the priests and the people fell into idolatry1 ,god did not immediately destroy the first temple4 ,he first tried whether they would listen to his warnings and repent1 and therefore 8he sent to them by his messengers1 rising up betimes1 and sending2 because he had compassion on his people1 and on his dwelling-place40 ,now1 surely1 when we see that ,god showed such compassion1 when ,he was about to send so small a calamity as the seventy years' captivity1 we may safely infer that he would not bring the more tremendous judgment of eighteen hundred years' desolation1 without exhibiting a compassion proportionate to the coming infliction4 ,in the former case he sent special messengers and prophets to warn them1 he must also have acted similarly before the second destruction4 ,who1 then1 were the messengers and the prophets that warned the ,jews of their sin8 ,the ,jews say1 that during the second temple there was no prophecy2 but is it possible to imagine that the ,god of ,israel would shut up his bowels of compassion1 and pity neither his people nor his dwelling-place1 but give them both over to the most dreadful visitation that ever descended on a nation without one word of warning8 ,when he was about to destroy ,nineveh he first sent ,jonah to call them to repentance1 and when his judgments were about to descend upon ,babylon1 the words of warning were miraculously written on the wall2 can we suppose1 then1 that ,god would not have as much mercy on ,jerusalem and the ,jews as on ,babylon and ,nineveh8 ,the supposition is utterly inconsistent with ,god's character and dealings4 ,there must have been prophets who announced the coming judgment and warned the people of their sin4 ,who were they1 then1 and what was that sin equal to idolatry which priests and people committed and obstinately persevered in1 despite of all warning1 and in which their descendants still persevere8 ,idolatry is a departure from the true ,god1 and the setting up a false system of religious worship4 ,now it is granted that the ,jews did not make images1 but did they set up a false system of worship and religion contrary to the religion of ,moses and the prophets8 ,let the oral law and the ,jewish ,prayer-books answer that question4 ,we have shown in these papers that the oral law1 sanctioned by the ,jewish ,prayer-books1 is directly at variance with the written ,word of ,god4 ,it teaches the ,jews to put trust in amulets1 charms1 and magic1 which are mere heathenism4 ,it teaches a cruel and unmerciful system for the ,jews1 gives false ideas of the character of ,god1 and actually forbids the ,jews to love their ,gentile brethren as themselves4 ,the setting up of this system was the great sin which priests and people all joined in committing1 and in which their posterity still continue4 ,they were warned against this sin3 ,god sent them extraordinary messengers1 ,he sent them ,jesus of ,nazareth1 the prophet like unto ,moses1 and the ,messiah4 ,the great burden of his preaching was against this false religion1 the oral law1 but they would not hearken to his words4 ,priests and people conspired together to reject and crucify him4 ,here1 then1 was the result of the false system which they adopted4 ,the oral law was the tree1 the rejection of the ,messiah the fruits4 ,but still the ,lord had compassion upon his people1 and upon his dwelling-place1 he spared them yet for forty years1 and in the meanwhile sent his apostles to warn them and testify against their iniquity2 8but they mocked the messengers of ,god1 and despised his words1 and misused his prophets1 until the wrath of the ,lord arose against his people1 till there was no remedy10 and he gave them into the hands of the ,romans4 ,because they rejected ,jesus of ,nazareth and his disciples1 the temple and city were desolated4 ,the ,jews have been taught to think that ,jesus and his disciples were deceivers1 but let them consider this fact1 that1 if they were1 ,god himself has sealed the truth of their assertions by the acts of ,his ,providence4 ,the preservation of the temple and city to this day would have been incontestable evidence that they were deceivers4 ,had no judgments followed upon the crucifixion of ,jesus1 it would have been evident to all mankind1 that he was not what he pretended to be4 ,but if he was indeed the ,messiah1 the strongest possible attestation that ,god could give1 was the exemplary punishment of those who crucified him1 and this ,god has given4 ,they crucified ,jesus1 and ,god destroyed the temple and scattered the people4 ,without this1 the religion of ,jesus never could have triumphed as it has done4 ,if the temple were still standing1 and the ,jews in their land1 they could point to the temple and say1 8,see that temple1 the monument of ,god's favour and presence1 it is still amongst us1 and shows that ,jesus could not have been the ,messiah4 ,if he had been the ,messiah1 ,god would not have left us this unequivocal testimony of his favour40 ,but this proof of their righteousness ,god has taken away1 and that within forty years after the crucifixion of ,jesus2 so that ,god himself has given the strongest possible attestation to the truth of his claims4 ,let any reflective ,israelite calmly consider this1 that1 if ,jesus was not what he claimed to be1 his crucifixion was the most meritorious act that the ,jews ever performed4 ,they thereby did what they could to stay the progress of a false religion that was to overrun the world1 and to uphold the truth2 can they1 then1 suppose that ,god would punish them for doing that which was right1 and give the sacred sanction of ,his providence to him that was doing wrong8 ,when ,phinehas1 the son of ,eleazar1 slew the ,israelite and the ,midianitish woman with his spear1 the plague was stayed from ,israel1 and can we imagine that the high priests who condemned ,jesus would have had a less reward if his claims had been false8 ,if ,christianity be not true1 then ,god himself has interposed to crush the truth1 and to build up falsehood4 ,if ,christianity be true1 then ,god could do nothing more to attest its truth than he has done by the destruction of the temple4 ,there was but one unanswerable argument against ,christianity1 and that was the existence of the temple2 but ,god himself has answered that argument by taking away the temple1 and therefore we infer that as ,god has done all that he could to establish the truth of ,christianity1 it must be true4 ,the ,jews think that if ,jesus had been the ,messiah1 it is impossible that the priests and learned men of his time could have rejected him4 ,but the events which they commemorate on the ninth of ,av show the untenableness of this argument4 ,on this day the ,jews commemorate1 first of all1 the decree that the ,israelites should die in the wilderness4 ,and why did they die in the wilderness8 ,because they would not believe in ,moses4 8,and all the children of ,israel murmured against ,moses and against ,aaron3 and the whole congregation said unto them1 ,would ,god that we had died in the land of ,egypt6 or would ,god that we had died in this wilderness6 ,and they said one to another1 ,let us make a captain1 and let us return into ,egypt40 7,numbers ,,xiv4 #b47 ,yet they had seen the plagues of ,egypt1 and they had passed through the ,red ,sea1 and were at that moment supplied miraculously with food1 but for all that they did not believe1 and that 8,the whole congregation40 ,will any ,jew say1 that this unbelief proves that ,moses was a false prophet8 ,if not1 why not8 ,every argument1 that will prove that the unbelief of that generation is no argument against the claims of ,moses1 will equally demonstrate that the unbelief of the ,jews in the time of ,jesus is no argument against his ,messiahship4 ,if it was possible for them to disbelieve the word of ,moses1 after all that they had seen1 it is equally possible that they should have rejected ,christ4 ,but remark here1 it was only the old generation that ,god sentenced to die in the wilderness4 ,the children who did not participate in the unbelief of their fathers entered into the land4 ,now if anything similar had happened to the ,jews since the destruction of the second temple1 that is1 if after a few years' captivity they had returned to their land without becoming ,christians1 they might then argue that the rejection of ,jesus was not the sin for which they were exiled4 ,they might say1 we have not become ,christians1 and yet ,god has restored us2 it is plain therefore that this was not the cause of the second desolation4 ,but ,god's dealings have been just the reverse4 ,the ,jewish nation have gone on from century to century1 fasting and humbling themselves before the ,god of their fathers1 and yet he does not restore them1 a plain token that they still participate in the sin of their fathers4 ,and a plainer proof still of the truth of ,christianity1 for ,god still continues the providential act1 whereby he originally proved that ,christianity was true4 ,israel still rejects ,christianity1 and therefore ,israel still continues in dispersion4 ,the only argument1 that could even appear to prove that the rejection of ,jesus was not the cause of the second desolation1 would be the restoration of the ,jews in an unconverted state4 ,but that argument ,god refuses to grant1 and has refused it to his beloved people for many centuries4 ,if ,judaism be true1 why should he thus continue to declare against it8 ,if ,christianity be false1 why should he from century to century stamp it with the seal of truth8 ,but1 in the next place1 the ,jews commemorate the destruction of the first temple1 that is1 they commemorate the idolatry of the chief priests and the people4 ,they remember that the learned and the unlearned of the nation rejected the true ,god and turned to dumb idols4 ,how then can the ,jews say that it is impossible for a nation1 that openly rejected the ,god of their fathers1 to reject the ,messiah8 ,there can be no greater proof of folly and wickedness than to reject ,god and worship a stock or a stone2 but of this ,israel has been guilty1 and because of this sin the first temple was destroyed4 ,the man who rejects the true ,god will also reject his messenger4 ,but ,israel has done the one1 why then should it be denied that they could do the other8 ,the only possible answer that can be given is1 that the priests and the people were a great deal wiser and better in the days of ,jesus than in those of the first temple4 ,but if this be true1 why was the temple destroyed8 why were those who were so much wiser and better1 punished with a more dreadful punishment than those who were so much more foolish and wicked8 ,if we are to judge of the comparative wisdom and piety of the two by the measure of punishment1 then we must say1 that the idolatrous priests and people of the first temple were a great deal wiser and better than the priests and people of the second temple1 for the former escaped1 after a captivity of seventy years1 the latter have been exiled for seventeen centuries4 ,the tremendous nature of the punishment would show1 that the priests and people1 who rejected ,jesus1 were more wicked than their idolatrous forefathers1 and if so1 their testimony against ,jesus is of no value4 ,but the ,jews also commemorate on this day the destruction of the city of ,bither1 that is1 they commemorate the folly of all their greatest rabbies in following an impostor1 and believing in him as their ,messiah4 ,there ,bar ,kochav took refuge with those whom he deluded4 ,rambam says1 8,all ,israel1 and the greatest of their wise men1 imagined him to be the ,messiah10 and we know that the famous ,rabbi ,akiva was amongst the number4 ,here1 then1 we have practical proof that the judgment of those rabbies1 who rejected ,jesus1 was not to be depended upon4 ,if they had succeeded in their efforts1 they would have taught all ,israel to believe in an impostor2 but the providence of ,god gave them all over to destruction in the very act of following a false prophet4 ,and yet these are the men who have handed down the oral law1 and compiled the precepts of rabbinic religion2 men1 whom the ,jews themselves tell us1 were the followers of a false prophet and the dupes of an impostor4 ,how can they possibly believe in a system which has such men for its authors2 men who seduced thousands and tens of thousands of ,israel to plunge themselves into ruin8 ,if ,rabbi ,akiva1 and his colleagues1 had not espoused the cause of ,bar ,kochav1 he could never have succeeded in deluding such numbers of ,israelites2 they1 therefore1 are answerable for that dreadful calamity4 ,but when the ,jews of the present day commemorate the sore affliction1 should they not remember also that it is high time to give up that religious system that was the cause of it1 and of all the evils that have since followed2 or at least seriously and carefully investigate a religion1 fidelity to which is compatible with the departure of ,god's favour1 the destruction of the temple1 and a long and awful captivity8 ,no4 ,,xxix4 ,,sabbatic ,,laws ,,continued4 ,in our last number but one the ,bible-doctrine1 that true religion must necessarily promote the happiness of man1 was laid down as the basis of our reasonings4 ,the truth of the principle is admitted by every thinking man1 whether ,jew or ,christian2 but plain as it is1 it is frequently overlooked1 and a large portion of mankind is accustomed to look on religion and its ordinances1 not as blessings in themselves1 nor as a course of moral discipline devised by the wisdom of ,god for the good of man1 but as a system of arbitrary enactments instituted to give men an opportunity of treasuring up a store of merit1 and of earning an eternal reward4 ,hence in all the superstitions1 which man has invented1 we perceive an undue regard for the mere external act2 and an expectation that the performance of the act will ensure the ,divine favour4 ,thus the modern ,hindoo stands on a sharp spike1 or suspends his poor body by an iron hook1 or offers it to be crushed under the wheels of the idol's chariot1 and thinks thereby to purchase eternal felicity4 ,and thus also the more ancient idolaters1 the worshippers of ,baal1 in the time of their need1 wounded themselves with knives and lances1 and expected that for such meritorious religious observances their prayers should be heard and that they should have a blessing4 ,but it is possible1 without professing a totally false religion1 to view ,god's true commandments in the same light1 and overlooking the spirit and the object of his institution1 to fix the whole attention upon the letter or outward act1 and the quantum of reward which it may purchase4 ,this the rabbies have done1 particularly1 in reference to the institution of the ,sabbath-day4 ,they appear to have forgotten altogether that the ,sabbath was made for man as a blessing and means of grace1 and have therefore in their attempts to promote the observance of the day1 entirely sacrificed the peace1 comfort1 and happiness of man to the mere appearance of preserving the letter of the command inviolate4 ,their fundamental idea of keeping the ,sabbath-day is1 that it is an act of obedience whereby something may be purchased4 1 1 1 1 1 8,we read in the sixteenth chapter of the treatise ,shabbath1 ,r4 ,johanan says1 in the name or ,r4 ,jose1 that to every one who makes the ,sabbath a delight1 an infinite inheritance is given4 ,rav ,nachman1 the son of ,isaac says1 ,he shall1 besides1 be delivered from serving the monarchies4 ,r4 ,judah says1 ,rav says1 ,to every one who makes the ,sabbath a delight1 the desires of his heart are given4 ,r4 ,chiia1 the son of ,abba1 says1 in the name of ,rabbi ,johanan1 whosoever keeps the ,sabbath according to its constitutions1 even though he were an idolater like ,enosh1 he shall be forgiven4 ,r4 ,judah says1 ,rav says1 ,if ,israel would keep the first ,sabbath according to its constitutions1 no nation nor tongue should rule over them4 ,r4 ,simeon1 the son of ,jochai1 says1 ,if ,israel would keep two ,sabbaths1 they should be immediately delivered40 7,arbah ,turim4 ,orach ,chaim1 #bdb47 ,thus the rabbles sanction the false and superstitious notion1 that an external act can purchase the favour of ,god1 and even atone for the most atrocious violation of the divine law4 ,the ,israelites are taught to believe that if they would only observe the ,sabbath according to the rabbinic constitution1 all their other transgressions would immediately be forgiven1 and they themselves restored to the land of their fathers1 and in the meanwhile the individual sinner is told not to be uneasy1 for that if he had committed idolatry1 the most heinous offence against ,god1 the observation of the rabbinical precepts respecting the ,sabbath will wipe away the score4 ,what then will he think1 who has ever kept himself outwardly from this capital offence1 and only been guilty1 as he thinks1 of sinning against his neighbour8 ,he will make sure that the ,sabbath observance will wipe out the week's reckoning1 and commence his sinful career again the following week with the assurance that if he only live until the ,sabbath-day1 he can make all good again4 ,and thus the ,sabbath-day1 ordained by ,god for the purpose of nurturing true religious feeling1 is by the oral law turned into the means of eradicating all religious principle out of the heart4 ,the end for which the external observance was instituted1 is not only forgotten1 but misrepresented4 ,the holy affections which it was meant to produce and nourish as a preparation for eternity are overlooked1 and the mere outward form held up as the price which men are to pay for eternal felicity4 ,that the rabbinical laws are almost altogether occupied with the merest external observances will be plain to any one who will take the trouble to read them through4 ,take1 for instance1 some of the laws which refer to the keeping food warm on the ,sabbath-day3-- 1 1 1 8,it is lawful to leave a pot on the fire1 or meat in the oven or upon the coals1 and although the cooking thus continues1 it is lawful to eat them on the ,sabbath4 ,but in this matter there are some things forbidden1 and the cause of the prohibition is lest any man should stir the fire on the ,sabbath4 ,for example1 food that has not been cooked as much as it requires1 or hot water that has not been sufficiently heated1 or food which has had the requisite cooking1 but which improves all the time that it is left to stew1 must not be left on the fire on the ,sabbath1 even though it may have been placed there1 whilst it was yet day on the ,friday4 ,this has been decreed1 lest one should stir the coals in order to finish the cooking thereof1 or to stew it4 ,therefore1 if the fire be swept up1 or covered with ashes1 or with the coarse part of flax1 or if the coals have ceased to glow1 for then they are looked upon as covered with ashes1 or if the fire had been made with straw or stubble1 or with the dung of small cattle1 then1 as there are no burning coals1 it is lawful to leave the food there on the ,sabbath1 for in this case the man's mind will be turned away from the cooking1 and the only object of the decree is1 lest the fire should be stirred40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 iii4 #c47 ,no one can deny that this passage prescribes the merest outward observances4 ,the general principle is that it is not lawful to stir the fire on the ,sabbath1 for that would be doing work1 and from this follow those other prohibitions of all things which might tempt a man to be guilty of this grave offence4 ,but they all refer to outward acts1 from which it is easy for any one1 without any great exertion of self-denial1 or any advance in moral discipline1 to abstain1 and yet he has all the merit and satisfaction of the most self-denying piety1 and thinks that he is thereby paying a part of the price of his salvation1 and making atonement for the gravest moral transgressions of which he may have been guilty during the week4 ,take1 again1 the following precepts1 and say whether they be not of the very same character3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,if a man travelling on the ,sabbath-eve be overtaken by night1#bh and has with him a purse1 and there be also with him a ,gentile and an ass1 let him give his purse to the ,gentile1 even after it be dark1 but let him not lay it on the ass4#bi ,but if he find anything1 he may not give it to the ,gentile1 unless it came into his hand whilst it was yet day1 for then it is a similar case to that of his purse4 ,if there be no ,gentile with him1 then let him lay it on the ass1 whilst he is moving1 but let him take great care to take it off every time he stands still4 ,but when he begins to move again1 then let him lay it on4 ,if there be with him an ass1 and a deaf and dumb person1 an idiot and a child1 then let him lay it on the ass1 but let him not give it to one of these1 for they are human beings like himself4 ,if there be with him a deaf and dumb person and an idiot1 let him give it to the idiot1 as he has no understanding at all4 ,if an idiot and a child1 let him give it to the idiot1 for the child will be reckoned amongst those that have understanding4 ,if a deaf and dumb person and a child1 let him give it to whichever he pleases4 ,if there be with him neither one nor the other1 let him move it along gradually1 each time less than four ells40 7,orach ,chaim1 sec4 #bff47 ,here again the great concern is to observe the form and letter of the rabbinical command1 which represents the carrying of a purse on the ,sabbath-day as work1 and therefore unlawful4 ,the law of ,moses says nothing either one way or the other1 but leaves it to every man's conscience4 ,the rabbies who made it unlawful soon found that serious inconvenience might arise1 as in the case of a man on a journey overtaken by the ,sabbath1 before he could get to a resting-place4 ,what is he to do1 is he to leave his purse behind rather than profane the ,sabbath8 ,that alternative the ,pharisees did not like1 and therefore set their wits to work to devise some plan1 whereby the outward form might be observed1 and yet the purse be safely conveyed along with its proprietor4 ,in the first place1 they allow it to be given to a ,gentile1 but every man of common sense will see that this only saves the outward appearance1 for it be unlawful to carry the purse1 it must be equally unlawful to cause it to be carried1 for he who commands or causes work to be done is really and in the sight of ,god the doer1 just as he who hires a man to murder a third person is in reality the murderer4 ,if1 therefore1 the ,jew dare not carry the purse himself1 neither may he give it to a ,gentile1 nor an idiot1 nor a child1 nor even lay it upon his ass4 ,this case only shows the insincerity of the ,scribes and ,pharisees1 and their love of money rather than of ,god's commandment4 ,in other cases they lay it down as a law that no ,jew is to ask a ,gentile to do work for him on the ,sabbath3-- 8,it is unlawful to tell a ,gentile to do work for us on the ,sabbath1 although the ,sabbath command is not binding upon him1 and although he told him before the ,sabbath1 and even though he should not require that work until after the ,sabbath4 ,this prohibition is of the words of the ,scribes1 and was made to prevent ,israelites from thinking lightly of the ,sabbath1 and thus coming at last to do the work themselves40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 vi4 #a47 ,here1 then1 the very thing which is allowed above1 is expressly forbidden on the authority of the ,scribes1 and consequently a transgression would make a man liable to be flogged1 as is expressly stated in this chapter3-- 1 8,an ,israelite who tells a ,gentile to do a certain work for him on the ,sabbath1 although he has transgressed1 and is to be flogged with the flogging of rebellion1 yet he may lawfully make use of that work when the ,sabbath is over1 if he wait as long as it would take to accomplish the work40 7,ibid4 #h47 ,these two passages1 then1 plainly contradict each other4 ,the one says it is unlawful to tell a ,gentile to do work on the ,sabbath1 and that he who does so is to be flogged4 ,the other permits a ,jew to give a ,gentile his purse to carry1 and this is work1 or else the ,jew might carry it himself4 ,now if the latter case be lawful1 then the former is also lawful2 and it is most cruel and tyrannical to flog a man for doing what is lawful4 ,on the other hand1 if1 according to the general rule1 it be unlawful1 then it is plainly unlawful in this particular case2 and it is plain that the ,scribes1 with all their pretensions1 thought it better to transgress what they considered a ,divine command1 then to lose their money4 ,but if the traveller has got neither an ass1 nor an idiot1 nor a ,gentile with him1 then there is apparently no way of escape1 for it is unlawful1 according to the oral law1 to carry any burden more than a distance of four ells on the ,sabbath-day2 and one would naturally expect1 that those who punish a profanation of the ,sabbath with stoning or flogging--that is1 who spare neither human blood nor life--would tell him to leave his purse1 rather than transgress the ,divine command4 ,but no1 they tell him to carry it less than four ells1 then to lay it down1 take it up and carry it again a distance of less than four ells1 and thus1 bit by bit1 carry it to the first inn4 ,here1 again1 there is an appearance of preserving the letter of the rabbinical command2 but no man in his senses can see that there is any real difference between carrying it at one turn1 or at five hundred short turns of less than four ells1 the whole distance is just the same1 and the work just the same in the sight of ,god4 ,either it is altogether lawful1 and then the rabbinical precepts appear as folly and tyranny1 or it is altogether unlawful1 and then these precepts appear as a mere evasion and a trick4 ,but1 in every case1 a cheap way is presented for purchasing salvation1 and atoning for past sin4 ,there is no great exertion of moral principle necessary to make the traveller let another person1 or an ass carry his purse to an inn4 ,another part of the rabbinical mode of observing the ,sabbath1 the preparation of the ,sabbath table1 has just the same tendency to direct the mind to the mere external act3-- 1 8,let a man arrange his table and spread the couches1 and order all the affairs of his house1 that he may find it ready and ordered when he returns from the synagogue2 for ,rabbi ,jose says1 in the name of ,rabbi ,chanina1 ,that two angels accompany a man on the ,sabbath eve1 on his return from the synagogue1 the one good1 the other evil4 ,when he comes to his house1 if the ,sabbath lamp be found lighted1 and the table prepared1 and the couch spread1 the good angel says1 ,god grant that it may be so the next ,sabbath2 and the evil angel must say ,amen1 in spite of himself4 ,but if this be not the case1 then the evil angel says1 ,god grant that it may be so on the next ,sabbath1 and then the good spirit must say ,amen1 in spite of himself40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #bfb47 ,let not the ,israelite think that we object to the decent and reverential preparation of the house for the ,sabbath1 that is all right and proper2 but to exalt this into a command1 and represent obedience to it as a meritorious act1 is to turn the mind to trivial outward performances1 and to teach men to rest on them as on the great duties of religion4 ,and here the mere putting of the house into order is represented as so grave a matter1 that two angels are sent home with every ,israelite on the ,sabbath eve1 to take cognizance of the matter4 ,the story of the angels is evidently a fable1 and is another proof of the fictitious character of the oral law2 but it shows how the rabbies wandered from the substance of religion to the mere shadow of external observances4 ,the ,sabbath lamp here mentioned is another instance of the same kind3-- 8,let a man be careful to have a handsome lamp1 for ,rav ,huna says1 ,he that is accustomed to take great care in trimming his ,sabbath lamp well1 will have children who shall be disciples of the wise1 i4e4 learned men40 ,no one can deny that this is a mere external act1 but yet it is represented as meritorious1 and payment is promised3 but the mode in which the performance is required is still more calculated to promote the idea1 that this external act is of great importance3-- 8,men and women are equally obligated to have a lighted lamp in their house on the ,sabbath4 ,yea1 though a man have nothing to eat1 he must beg from door to door1 and get oil1 and light the lamp1 for this is an essential part of the ,sabbath delight4 ,he is also bound to pronounce the benediction1 ,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord1 ,king of the world6 who has sanctified us by his commandments1 and commanded us to light the ,sabbath lamp40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 v4 #a47 ,of course every ,jew1 who thinks that a ,sabbath lamp is as necessary as food1 and that ,god requires it even from him that has no food1 must think that it is of great value1 and that obedience to this command is a most meritorious act4 ,and yet all must confess that it is a mere outward performance1 which may be observed by him who has neither the fear nor the love of ,god4 ,the tendency of all these laws is the same1 that is1 to draw the mind away from the solemn duties of religion1 and to persuade the impenitent sinner that these observances will atone for his transgressions4 ,when conscience reminds him of sins1 not those which he has committed long since1 of which he has repented1 and which1 he has forsaken1 but of those which he has been committing the past week1 and intends to commit again1 as soon as the ,sabbath is over1 it is silenced by an enumeration of the various acts of obedience1 which are to be set down at the other side of the account4 ,he remembers that he has never left a pot of victuals on a forbidden fire1 nor carried his purse on the ,sabbath-day a distance of more than four ells1 nor asked a ,gentile to do work for him4 ,that1 on the contrary1 he has always prepared his table1 and lighted his ,sabbath lamp1 and pronounced the benediction2 or1 in other words1 that he has kept the ,sabbath according to its constitution1 and that1 therefore1 though he had been guilty of idolatry1 he shall obtain forgiveness4 ,thus these rabbinic precepts have a direct tendency to mislead the multitude1 to harden them in sin1 and thus to make and keep them unfit for that great ,sabbath1 which yet remains for the people of ,god4 ,footnote #bh3 ,that is1 if the ,sabbath commence before he can get to a resting place4 ,footnote #bi3 ,for thou art commanded respecting the resting of the ass1 but not respecting that of the ,gentile4 ,no4 ,,xxx4 ,,sabbatic ,,laws ,,continued4 ,that religion1 which is true1 and has ,god for its author1 is1 like the light of the sun1 the common property of all who will only open their eyes1 and gaze upon the gift of ,god4 ,it is not a religion for the rich or the studious only1 but is equally open to the understanding and the hearts of the poor and unlearned4 ,and therefore the ,bible describes the heavenly wisdom thus--8,she standeth in the top of high places1 by the way in the places of the paths2 she crieth at the gates at the entry of the city1 at the coming in at the doors3 ,unto you1 ,o men1 ,i call2 and my voice is to the sons of man4 ,o ye simple1 understand wisdom2 and1 ye fools1 be of an understanding heart40 7,prov4 viii4 #b-e47 ,and so ,god invites men of every class by the mouth of the prophet--8,ho1 every one that thirsteth1 come ye to the waters1 and he that hath no money2 come ye1 buy and eat2 yea1 come1 buy wine and milk without money and without price40 7,isa4 lv4 #a47 ,every religion of man's making1 presents1 on the contrary1 peculiar advantages to the rich and the learned4 ,it offers salvation either as the purchase of almsgiving1 or as the reward of religious study1 or it makes religion so difficult and intricate as to put it out of the poor labouring man's power to acquire any competent knowledge of its requirements4 ,and any system that does so must necessarily be false4 ,religion is as necessary to the soul as daylight is to the corporeal eye1 and it would be a hard case1 indeed1 if the poor1 who want it most1 should be excluded from the possibility of acquiring its consolations2 or if1 in the day of judgment1 the man who devotes his life to books should have a better chance1 than he who labours hard to get an honest living for himself and his family2 yet this is the case with the labouring classes of the ,jews4 ,the religion of the oral law has so perplexed even the simplest commandments1 that an unlearned man has no chance of being able to keep them4 ,if nothing more were required for salvation than the rabbinic sanctification of the ,sabbath-day the majority of the ,jewish people must despair of attaining it2 for the accurate knowledge of the innumerable precepts and distinctions1 which is indispensable to obedience1 requires time and study1 which no labouring man can bestow4 ,and we are convinced that a considerable portion of the ,jewish population of this city live in continual profanation of the ,sabbath-day1 if the rabbinic explanations be true4 ,either they move something which they ought not to move1 or they carry something which they ought not to carry2 and1 if they do it wilfully1 render themselves liable to the utmost severity of the law4 ,for instance1 the rabbies have determined that in one place it is lawful to move or carry certain things on the ,sabbath-day1 but in another place the very some act is unlawful1 and calls down extreme punishment4 ,they distinguish between these places thus-- 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 ,in reference to the ,sabbath1 places are distinguished into four sorts of jurisdiction4 #ast1 the private jurisdiction2 #b;d1 the public jurisdiction2 #c;d1 the place called ,karmelith2 #dth1 the place which is free4 ,by a private jurisdiction is meant a place surrounded by walls1 ten handbreadths high1 and in which there is a space of four handbreadths by four4 ,but even though it should contain many miles1 if it be inclosed for habitation1 and its gates be bolted at night1 it is a private jurisdiction4 ,a lodging-place1 an inclosed space1 and a court1 are considered as in the same class4 ,and thus1 also1 a pit which is ten handbreadths deep1 and whose breadth is four by four1 or more2 and a raised place which is ten handbreadths high1 and whose breadth is four by four4 ,the top of the walls1 also1 by which a private jurisdiction is surrounded1 and the openings in them1 are considered as private jurisdiction4 ,the air of a private jurisdiction1 up to the firmament1 is also considered2 and even a vessel like a chest1 if it be ten handbreadths high1 and in breadth four by four4 ,a hollow vessel1 or a tower1 is also considered as a private jurisdiction4 ,the term public jurisdiction includes roads and streets1 if their breadth be sixteen ells by sixteen1 and they be open from gate to gate1 and six hundred thousand persons pass thereon4 ,and everything in a public jurisdiction1 which is not three handbreadths high1 is reckoned as the ground1 and is public jurisdiction3 even thorns and filth upon which the public does not tread4 ,but if it be from three to nine handbreadths high1 but not nine entirely1 and its breadth be four by four1 it is called a ,karmelith4 8,if it be less1 it is called a free place40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #cdd47 ,now it may well be doubted1 concerning many ,jews in this city1 whether they are acquainted with even this portion of the ,sabbath laws1 but it is quite certain that they are ignorant of the innumerable modes of possible transgression which arise from these distinctions2 for the oral law then goes on to define what is lawful concerning each4 ,in a public jurisdiction he may move anything four ells3-- 8,every man has got four ells within which he may move things40 ,or1 as ,rambam expresses it-- 1 8,in a private jurisdiction1 and in a free place it is lawful to move things the whole length of the place1 even though the length of each should be many miles4 ,but in a public jurisdiction or a ,karmelith things may not be moved more than four ells40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 xxiv4 #aa47 ,now1 it may well be asked1 upon what passage of the law of ,moses these distinctions are grounded1 and what there is in a public jurisdiction which converts an act lawful in a private jurisdiction1 into a sin to be expiated only by stoning the offender8 ,for instance1 in a private jurisdiction a man may carry certain matters for miles without violating the ,sabbath commands1 but if he venture out into a public jurisdiction with a pocket-handkerchief or a snuff-box1 or a half-crown in his pocket1 and carry it only five ells1 he is guilty of death2 and if the ,talmudists held the reigns of power1 would be led out as soon as the ,sabbath was over1 and stoned4 ,reason revolts against such doctrine1 the act is the very same in both cases1 and is therefore in both cases a sin1 or in both cases lawful4 ,humanity shudders at the thought of stoning a man for carrying a pocket-handkerchief1 and the ,bible teaches us that a religion1 teaching such inexorable and wanton cruelty1 cannot be from ,god4 ,it is true that at present the power of ,christianity protects ,israelites from such harsh treatment2 but wherever the ,talmud has any degree of influence1 ,israel groans under its bondage4 ,many a time have we seen ,jews with their pocket-handkerchief tied round their knee like a garter1 for this is lawful1 though to carry it in his pocket would be a grave and capital offence4 ,and we once knew an ,israelite who was taking a walk on the ,sabbath-day1 and being addressed by a ,gentile beggar1 put his hand into his pocket and gave the poor man a small coin4 ,he was observed by some ,talmudists1 who immediately attacked him for his profanation of the ,sabbath4 ,afraid of losing his character1 and being at that time more anxious for the praise of man than that which cometh of ,god1 he defended himself by saying1 that he had unintentionally taken out the money in his pocket1 but had remembered it when addressed by the beggar1 and therefore took the opportunity of getting rid of that which it was not lawful to carry4 ,the ,talmudists were satisfied1 and their wrath changed into profound admiration for his piety4 ,these cases exemplify the practical working of the rabbinic system4 ,it burdens the consciences of the sincere1 and makes the unscrupulous hypocrites4 ,it may be replied that such things could not happen in ,england1 and that here the ,jews are too enlightened to observe such distinctions4 ,but every one who makes this reply condemns modern ,judaism as a religion unfit for the observation of the enlightened1 and if he be a conscientious man1 should protest against doctrines which he believes to be false1 and laws which he abhors as cruel4 ,these ,sabbatic laws are a part1 an essential part1 of modern ,judaism4 ,there is not any part of the oral law upon which ,talmudists lay more stress4 ,the man1 therefore1 who does not observe them has changed his religion4 ,he has got a new faith1 as really1 as if he had been baptized and professed ,christianity4 ,every ,israelite who carries a pocket-handkerchief in his pocket through the streets of ,london on the ,sabbath-day1 has apostatized from that ,jewish religion1 which has been professed for near two thousand years1 and practically declares that the religion of the synagogue is false4 ,how then can he1 without hypocrisy1 profess to believe in the religion of the ,jews8 or how can he1 as an honest man1 uphold a system which he regards as false1 and which would have him executed as a criminal if it had the power8 ,if such persons1 who live in the habitual transgression of all the ,sabbatic laws1 have any regard for truth and for ,divine revelation1 they should openly declare their sentiments1 announce to the world that they have forsaken the religion of their fathers1 and assert that religion which they regard as true4 ,the blindest and most bigoted ,talmudist is a far more respectable man1 and more acceptable in the sight of ,god1 than he who pretends to profess a religion in which he does not believe1 and whose precepts he regards as fanatical and superstitious4 ,but to return4 ,from the above laws it appears that it is a sin to carry anything in a public jurisdiction a distance of more than four ells4 ,but suppose1 then1 that there was something which the ,talmudists might find it convenient or desirable to move to a greater distance1 is there no provision to effect its conveyance8 ,yes4 ,these scrupulous persons1 who would stone a man to death for carrying anything five ells1 have an expedient for conveying it a hundred miles if necessary3-- 8,therefore it is lawful for a man to move a matter from the public jurisdiction1 and to give it to his neighbour1 who is within a distance of four ells2 and his neighbour to his neighbour again1 and so on1 even for a hundred miles4 ,for although the thing itself go many miles1 each person has only moved it his four ells40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #cdh47 ,we have often heard of the wonderful effects of division of labour1 but never knew before that it could convert a capital offence into an innocent employment4 ,surely it is not necessary to prove that if it be unlawful for one person to do a particular act1 it is equally unlawful for a hundred persons to combine for its performance4 ,this law really has more the appearance of a caricature devised by some enemy of the oral law1 than the grave decision of religious men in a matter of life and death4 ,but if we examine a little further1 we shall find that it is unlawful to move this same thing1 whatever it be1 from one jurisdiction to another1 though that other be close at hand3-- 1 8,as it is unlawful to move anything in the place called ,karmelith1 so it is unlawful to carry anything out of it into a public or private jurisdiction1 or1 vice versa1 to introduce anything from either of these into the ,karmelith4 ,but if any one does either he is not guilty10 that is1 he is only to get a flogging1 but not to be stoned4 ,an unlearned man who had already seen something conveyed by the above expedient1 might easily be led to commit an offence of this kind4 ,his untutored mind might not perceive why the one should be sinful1 if the other was lawful2 but such an assertion of common sense would draw down certain chastisement4 ,at all events1 he might be tempted to put his head from one jurisdiction into another1 especially if he was standing in the street1 and was offered a drink by a friend in a house1 he might put his head into the window and take what was offered1 but would soon find1 to his cost1 that he had broken one of the ,sabbatic laws3-- 8,a man may not stand in a private jurisdiction1 and put forth his head into a public jurisdiction1 and then drink1 or vice versa4 ,but if he does so1 let him introduce his head and most of his body into the place in which he drinks1 for as he wants the water1 we fear lest he should take it to himself 7into the place where he is standing74 ,but it is lawful to stand in a private or public jurisdiction and drink in that which is called ,karmelith4 7,orach ,chaiim1 #cdi47 ,it is evident that no unlearned man can stand a fair chance with laws like these4 ,he could not hope even to escape corporal punishment4 ,but if the accurate observance of such laws was the condition of salvation1 he would have reason to despair4 ,the most honest desire to yield obedience and the utmost exertion of his understanding will not help him1 nor compensate for his ignorance4 ,if1 for instance1 he should conclude1 because it is unlawful for himself to have his head in one jurisdiction and his body in another whilst he is drinking1 that it would be equally unlawful for cattle in the same predicament to get food1 he would be mistaken3-- 8,a beast that has got most of its body outside1 and its head inside1 may be fed40 ,and if he should take this as the general rule of his conduct1 he would be mistaken again1 for long-necked animals form an exception3-- 8,but in the ease of the camel1 he must have his head and most of his body inside1 because his neck is long40 7,hilchoth ,shabbath1 c4 xxv4 #a47 ,and so with endless cases which arise from this one distinction of places into four classes4 ,judaism is in all its parts a religion for the studious1 and for them only4 ,for an unlearned man to keep the ,sabbath1 as the oral law requirers1 is absolutely impossible4 ,and after all1 what good does it bestow upon those who spend their life in the study8 ,does it improve the heart1 or open more abundant views of the ,divine mercy1 or fill the soul with love to man8 ,that it sharpens the wit and subtlety1 we do not doubt1 but that is but small profit to man in general4 ,the criminal law of any country will do the same1 and in truth the oral law is very little more than the rabbinical criminal code4 ,its great subject is guilty and not guilty4 ,and even in this it does not address itself to the conscience1 and lead a man to consider the workings of the heart and the wanderings of the thought1 and shew him sin at its fountain-head4 ,it is a mere dry detail of external observances1 as may be seen from the numerous specimens adduced in these papers1 and as might be shown more fully by translating the whole4 ,if real devout feeling and improvement of the heart in the fear of ,god and the love of man be true religion1 we might expect it1 if anywhere1 in the ,sabbath laws4 ,the ,sabbath is that holy day which ,god has set apart to raise men's thoughts from earth to heaven4 ,it is that period of earned relaxation on which even the poor and the unlearned may lay aside their worldly cares and occupations1 and meditate upon the love and will of ,god1 and that eternity to which he is hastening4 ,in the laws1 then1 respecting the observance of this day1 we might naturally expect the spirit of devotion to be manifested2 but in the oral law we look in vain for anything of the kind4 ,its directions about the ,sabbath are one continued dry detail of external observances1 which to a conscientious man acquainted with them1 must constitute a load upon his conscience1 sufficient to make the ,sabbath the most unhappy day of all the seven4 ,but as to the poor and labouring classes1 who have no time for study1 it is impossible that they should know1 and much more that they should keep1 all that is necessary for the right observation of the rabbinic ,sabbath4 ,if1 therefore1 the oral law were true1 the poor must lose a large portion of the blessings1 and even be in danger of perdition4 ,nay1 if it be true1 then we must believe that ,god has given a religion impossible to be observed by the poor1 and offering great advantages to the rich and learned1 that is that ,he is a respecter of persons1 though ,moses and the prophets teach the contrary4 ,but we would ask our readers1 what use is it to them to profess a religion of which they can never attain a competent knowledge8 ,we venture to affirm that the majority of ,israelites do not know enough of the oral law to help them to keep the ,sabbath1 much less to observe the six hundred and thirteen commandments2 can it be said1 then1 that they possess a religion with which they are not even acquainted8 ,if the knowledge and practice of the oral law be necessary to constitute a true ,jew1 ninety-nine out of every hundred must give up their claims to the ,jewish name4 ,but then what is to become of the ,jewesses1 who are not even obligated to learn8 ,every rabbi will be willing to confess that the women at least are ignorant of the oral law4 ,can they then have a portion in the world to come8 ,if the knowledge and practice of the oral law be necessary to salvation1 they cannot4 ,but if they can be saved without it1 then it follows that ,god has given a law1 the knowledge of which is not necessary to salvation4 ,let every ,jew ask himself this question1 ,am ,i acquainted with all the precepts of the oral law8 ,if not1 can ,i be saved without this knowledge8 ,if ,i cannot1 then the ,jewish religion is one which makes it impossible for the poor to be saved4 ,if ,i can1 then the ,jewish religion is of no real use1 for ,i can be saved even without knowing it4 ,such a religion cannot be from ,god4 ,his religion is necessary to be known by every man1 woman1 and child in the world1 and the knowledge of it is just as easy to be acquired by the poor and unlearned as by the rich and studious4 ,let then the poor and the unlearned consider the folly of professing a religion1 with which they can never hope to become acquainted1 and let them return to the religion of ,moses and the prophets1 which1 by the help of the ,god of ,israel1 every one can understand1 at least so far as is necessary to salvation4 ,the ,bible1 like everything that has ,god for its author1 has beauties discoverable by the eye of the poor1 at the same time that it has perfections to exercise the observation and skill of the most learned4 ,and this holy book is the heritage of ,israel1 which the oral law can never be4 ,the oral law may be the heritage and religion of the rabbies who know it1 but it has no more to do with the religion of those who know it not1 than the laws of the ,chinese4 ,the great majority of the ,jewish people might just as well call themselves followers of ,confucius4 ,no man can be said to believe in doctrines which he does not know1 and can never hope to know3 and this is the case with nine-tenths of the oral law4 ,no4 ,,xxxi4 ,,rabbinic ,,excommunication4 ,it is a fact1 that the religion of the oral law has hitherto done but little to promote the temporal welfare of the ,jewish people1 and it is equally certain that1 if supreme1 it would destroy the happiness both of ,jews add ,gentiles4 ,its endless definitions would necessarily produce transgression4 ,its severity and readiness in excommunication would be the source of constant trouble to individuals and families1 and the sanguinary spirit of its criminal code would make the ,jews a nation of mourners4 ,indeed1 we seriously doubt1 whether any1 but a few fanatics1 wish to see the oral law vested with supreme power1 and ruling over the lives and properties of the ,jewish nation4 ,every reflecting ,israelite must know that the ,sanhedrin1 wielding the absolute power ascribed to it in the rabbinic traditions1 would be the most oppressive tribunal that ever lorded it over the consciences of men4 ,but we must remember that it would not be with the ,sanhedrin and other tribunals alone1 that the ,israelites would have to do4 ,every rabbi1 and every disciple of a wise man1 would have the right of excommunicating any one who offended them4 ,after determining that the tribunals can and ought in certain cases to excommunicate1 the oral law adds-- 1 1 4 8,and in like manner the wise man himself may1 on account of his honour1 excommunicate an unlearned man who has treated him with contumely1 and there is no need of witnesses nor admonition4 ,and the excommunicate person is not to be absolved until he appease the wise man4 ,but if the wise man die1 three persons come and absolve him4 ,if1 however1 the wise man wish to pardon1 and not excommunicate him1 the power is in his own hand40 7,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah1 c4 vi4 #ab47 ,from this law we see that the restoration of rabbinic power would be the most oppressive system of government ever devised4 ,every learned man would be a petty tyrant1 constituting both judge and jury in his own person1 and able1 at his own caprice1 to inflict a severe punishment4 ,the most absolute aristocracy of the feudal times never dared to assume or exercise a power so monstrous and so oppressive4 ,no priesthood1 even in the darkest times1 ever claimed such personal authority as is here given to every individual rabbi4 ,it is true that he may1 if he please1 forgive the unfortunate offender1 but it is much to be feared that such absolute power would in most cases be too strong a temptation to the frail sons of men4 ,and at all events the principle is utterly inconsistent with wise legislation1 and most dangerous to the liberty of the poor and unlearned2 for the reader will observe that it is only an unlearned man1 an 8am-haaretz10 who may be dealt with in this summary manner4 ,and this is another proof that the religion of the oral law is a religion devised for the advantage of the rich and learned1 but regardless of the spiritual and temporal welfare of the lower classes4 ,for the learned and the great the law is very different3-- 1 8,a wise man1 old in wisdom1 or a prince1 or a president of a tribunal1 who has sinned1 is never to be excommunicated publicly1 unless he have done as ,jeroboam1 the son of ,nebat1 and his companions4 ,but when he commits other sins1 he is to be flogged in private4 ,for it is said1 #8,therefore shalt thou fall in the day1 and the prophet also shall fall with thee in the night1' 7,hos4 iv4 #e17 i4e41 although he fall1 cover him as it were with the night4 ,and they say to him1 #8,honour thyself1 and abide in thy house4' 7#b ,kings xiv4 #aj47 ,in like manner1 when a disciple of a wise man makes himself guilty of excommunication1 it is unlawful for the tribunal to be too quick1 and to excommunicate him hastily40 7,ibid4 c4 vii4 #a47 ,the rabbies have endeavoured to justify this different legislation for the learned and unlearned by a verse of the ,bible1 but their interpretation of that verse is quite erroneous4 ,when ,god says1 8,therefore shalt thou fall in the day1 and the prophet shall also fall with thee in the night10 he is not speaking of the learned and unlearned1 nor of the different way in which their sins were to be punished1 but of the destruction which was coming upon ,israel1 as may be seen in ,kimchi's ,commentary4 ,he interprets the verse thus-- 1 1 1 1 1 8,therefore shalt thou stumble in the day40 ,this refers to ,israel1 and means on account of thy deeds thou shalt stumble and fall4 ,this day2 that is1 in this time2 thy fall shall soon come4 ,and so we read1 8,then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day40 7,deut4 xxxi4 #ag47 ,and again1 8,in that day there shall be a root of ,jesse10 7,isaiah xi4 #aj17 where day means time and period4 ,and the prophet also shall fall with thee in the night1 that is1 the false prophet who deceiveth thee shall stumble with thee1 as men stumble in the night in darkness2 and so the ,targum of ,jonathan has it4 7,kimchi1 ,comment4 in ,hos4 iv4 #b47 ,kimchi and ,jonathan1 then1 both testify that the oral law gives a false interpretation of this verse4 ,this is in itself rather awkward for a law that professes to have been given by ,god1 but still more so when it is made the basis of most unjust and partial legislation1 to save the learned from the punishment which an unlearned man would have in similar circumstances to suffer4 ,no one can deny that the learned and unlearned are here placed on very unequal terms4 ,if an unlearned man provoke a rabbi1 he may be excommunicated by that individual without either judge or jury1 or even the form of a trial4 ,but if a learned man makes himself liable to the same punishment1 even a court of justice has not the power to pronounce the sentence4 ,who can doubt that the rabbies made these laws for their own convenience8 ,can any one believe that ,god has given this law1 which makes the learned a privileged class of persons1 who1 though guilty of the same offence as the working classes1 is to be spared1 whilst they are to be punished8 ,god is no respecter of persons1 and therefore no such law can be from him4 ,the extreme injustice of this mode of legislation will appear still more from considering the nature of the punishment3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 444 8,how is an excommunicate person to conduct himself1 and how are others to conduct themselves towards him8 ,it is unlawful for an excommunicate person1 as for a mourner1 to trim his heard or hair1 or to wash all the days of his excommunication2 neither is he to be associated in pronouncing the benedictions2 neither is he to be reckoned as one of ten1 wherever ten persons are required2 neither may any one sit within four ells of him4 ,he may however teach others and be taught4 ,he may hire and be hired4 ,but if he die in his excommunication1 the tribunal send and lay a stone upon his coffin to signify that they stone him because he is separated from the congregation4 ,and it is unnecessary to say that he is not to be mourned for1 and that his funeral is not to be attended4444 ,whosoever remains thirty days in his excommunication without seeking to be absolved1 is to be excommunicated a second time4 ,if he abide thirty days more without seeking absolution1 he is then to be anathematized40 7,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah1 ibid47 ,this1 then1 is the punishment which a learned man has it in his power to inflict at will4 ,he may deprive him of the comforts of cleanliness and perhaps injure his health4 ,he may hold him up to the public scorn by separating him by four ells from all decent people4 ,he may heap obloquy upon his death and deprive him of a respectful burial1 or if the man survive under the public contempt1 and refuse to give the rabbi satisfaction1 he will be anathematized1 and his prospects for this world1 at least1 irretrievably ruined4 ,the law respecting the anathematized person is this3-- 1 1 8,he is not to teach others nor to be taught1 but may learn by himself that he may not forget the learning4 ,he is not to be hired1 nor to hire4 ,men may have no dealings with him1 nor any business except a little that he may get a livelihood40 ,now then suppose that an unlearned man does or says something1 which a rabbi interprets as contempt1 he is first excommunicated4 ,if1 in the consciousness of innocence1 he refuses to ask for the rabbi's forgiveness1 he is at last anathematized1 and all his business stopped1 and all this is done to him because he is an unlearned man4 ,he is himself to be dishonoured1 his business ruined1 and he himself to die of a broken heart1 not because he has committed some grievous crime1 but because he has been wanting in respect either to the rabbi's person or his words4 ,the most absolute autocrat never made a law more despotic4 ,but some one will say1 that the rabbi has the power of forgiving if he please1 and that the oral law recommends him to do so4 ,it is true that if the affront be given in private1 he has this power1 and is told to forgive1 but not so if it be offered in public1 he has then no choice4 ,he is bound to excommunicate the offender4 ,that we may not appear to act unfairly1 we will give the whole passage3-- 1 1 1 1 8,although a wise man has the power to excommunicate on account of his honour1 yet it is not to be praised in the disciple of a wise man who does so4 ,on the contrary he ought to shut his ears against the words of an unlearned man 7am-haaretz71 and not to attend to them1 according as ,solomon has said in his wisdom1 #8,take no heed to all the things that are spoken4' 7,eccles4 vii4 #ba47 ,and such was the custom of the saints of old1 who heard their reviling1 but did not answer2 and not only so1 but they pardoned the reviler1 and forgave him4 ,the greatest of the wise men used to glory in their good deeds1 and say1 that they had never excommunicated nor anathematized any man on account of their honour1 and this is the way in which the disciples of the wise men ought to walk4 ,in what case is this to be applied8 ,when they have been despised or reviled in secret4 ,but if the disciple of a wise man be despised or reviled by any man publicly1 it is unlawful for him to forgive any affront to his honour1 and if he forgive he is to be punished1 for this is a contempt of the law4 ,he is on the contrary1 to avenge and keep the thing in mind1 like a serpent1 until the offender entreat to be forgiven40 7,ibid4 c4 vii4 #ac47 ,the great object of these laws is plainly to uphold the power and dignity of the rabbies1 and to make it impossible for the people to shake off their yoke4 ,the care which is taken to punish every offence against the wise men betrays a lurking consciousness of error1 and a fear lest the common people should compare their precepts with ,scripture1 assert the plain unsophisticated truth1 and thus shake off the galling chains of rabbinism4 ,to prevent this1 the very first semblance of disobedience is to be punished with excommunication4 ,but for the poor and unlearned1 if insulted by a learned man1 there is no satisfaction4 ,he cannot thunder out an excommunication or an anathema in return4 ,for him the oral law makes no provision1 except for his punishment4 ,if ,judaism1 therefore1 should ever attain the supreme power1 the working and unlearned classes will be placed in the power and at the mercy of the learned1 and every disciple of a wise man will wield the absolute power of an autocrat4 ,but some one may say1 that if the disciple of a wise man should excommunicate any one hastily that the people would not regard his excommunication4 ,but if they did not1 they would do it at their peril1 for the oral law expressly declares that they are bound to observe the excommunication not only of a rabbi1 but of one of his disciples3-- 8,when a rabbi excommunicates on account of his honour1 all his disciples are bound to treat the excommunicate person as such4 ,but when a disciple excommunicates on account of his own honour1 the rabbi is not bound to treat that person as excommunicate1 but all the people are bound40 7,ibid4 c4 vi4 #ac47 ,nothing can more clearly prove the injustice of such excommunication4 ,if the rabbi be not bound to regard the disciples' excommunication1 why should all the people be bound8 ,if the offence committed against the disciple be a sin before ,god1 and such it ought to be to require such severe punishment1 the excommunication ought to be as binding upon the rabbi as upon the people4 ,but if it be not binding upon the rabbi1 then the offence for which it was inflicted cannot be a sin in the sight of ,god1 it is therefore an arbitrary and unjust punishment1 and it is both wicked and cruel to require the people to obey it4 ,but the principle itself is monstrous1 that the disciple of a rabbi should be constituted both judge and jury in his own case1 and have the power of lording it over those1 whose circumstances do not permit them to devote their time to study1 and who1 therefore1 cannot be enrolled in the privileged class4 ,just suppose that the clergy of this land1 or the professors and students at our ,universities1 were to claim such power1 and to excommunicate and anathematize all who treated them with disrespect1 and that without any trial or conviction before a legal tribunal1 and that the unfortunate victims were to be separated from society1 ruined1 and then their dead bodies treated with dishonour1 would not this be regarded as a monstrous and insupportable tyranny8 ,yet this is what the oral law claims for the rabbies and their disciples1 and what they would possess and exercise if ,judaism ever attains to supreme power4 ,would the ,jews wish such a power established8 ,do they desire to live under such a government8 ,if they do not1 if they prefer the personal liberty and the even-handed justice secured to them by ,christian laws1 then they confess that the ,christian principles are better than those of their own religion1 and they must be charged with inconsistency in professing and asserting the truth of a religion1 which they hope may never triumph4 ,every man who believes his religious principles to be ,divine1 must wish that they should triumph1 and that they should have free scope for their development4 ,any man who dreads the triumph of his religion must have secret misgivings that it is false4 ,we therefore ask every ,jew whether he desires that the oral law should attain that absolute power which it claims1 and that every rabbi and his disciples should have the power of excommunicating and anathematizing all who affront them8 ,one of the most perfect tests of a religion1 is to consider what would be its effects if supreme4 ,at present there are various systems of religion in the world1 some of which1 as directly contradicting others1 must be decidedly false4 ,the hope of all reflecting men is1 that the truth will ultimately triumph1 that ,god himself will at last interpose1 and establish the dominion of truth and eradicate all error4 ,each hopes that his own system will then prevail1 but let him follow out that system1 and see how it will work1 when all resistance shall be vain4 ,let the ,jews calmly consider the state of things1 when the rabbies and their disciples shall be masters of the world1 as they must one day be1 if ,judaism be true4 ,the unlearned will then be completely at their mercy1 their servants and their bondmen4 ,will this be a happy condition1 or is this state of things desirable8 ,in the first place1 there will be no personal liberty4 ,any man who may chance to differ from a rabbi1 and treat him with disrespect will immediately be excommunicated4 ,in the second place1 there will be no liberty of conscience or of thought4 ,every man must then let the rabbies think for him1 and he must be content to receive their decisions without any appeal4 ,the body will scarcely have the appearance of being free1 and the intellect will be bound in fetters of adamant4 ,it will no doubt be a glorious period for the wise men and their disciples1 but they will always form a small minority1 compared with the bulk of mankind4 ,the majority of ,israel1 not now to speak of the ,gentiles1 will then be degraded into poor1 crouching1 submissive servants of the learned1 afraid to use their reason1 and always having the fear and dread of excommunication before their eyes4 ,do they then honestly wish for such a state of things1 to be tied hand and foot1 and given into the hands of their learned men8 ,if they do not1 if they see the horror and the injustice and degradation of such a state of things1 why do they profess a religion which will inevitably lead to it1 if it be true8 ,if such laws be unjust1 and such a consummation dreadful1 instead of desirable1 the religion of the oral law must necessarily be false2 and it is the duty of every ,israelite to consider what he is doing in upholding it4 ,the present state of things will not continue always4 ,the ,jewish nation cannot always wish to be wanderers in foreign lands4 ,they look forward to a restoration to the land of their fathers1 and they wish in that land to be happy and prosperous4 ,but happiness and prosperity will be unknown words1 if they are then to be governed according to the principles of the oral law4 ,that law gives the learned a monopoly of power and happiness1 but leaves the mass of the nation in bondage4 ,do they then1 in contemplating the re-establishment of the kingdom of ,israel1 expect another than the oral law1 and other principles of religion and justice8 ,if they do1 they confess that the oral law is false1 and if it would be false and hurtful1 and destructive of all happiness1 if supreme1 it is equally false and hurtful now4 ,the ,israelite1 therefore1 who upholds it1 is upholding a false system4 ,he may do it in ignorance1 and we believe that this is the case with the majority2 but it is most unbecoming in any reasonable man to profess a religion of which he is ignorant4 ,he may answer1 ,i have no time to acquire an accurate knowledge of my religion4 ,the books in which it is contained are too voluminous to admit of my acquiring an acquaintance with them4 ,i must work for my bread4 ,we grant that this is the fact1 but then this brings us back to our original position1 that ,judaism is only a religion for those who have leisure1 that is1 for the rich and the learned1 and we conclude1 on that very account1 that it cannot be from ,god1 who looks neither at riches nor learning1 but considereth the welfare1 and above all1 the religious welfare of the poorest of his creatures4 ,the especial character of the ,messiah is1 that he will care for the poor4 8,he shall judge the poor of the people1 he shall save the children of the needy40 7,psalm lxxii4 #d47 ,he1 therefore1 cannot have the religion of the oral law4 ,he will not be a rabbi1 nor a rabbi's disciple4 ,no4 ,,xxxii4 ,,new ,,year',s ,,day4 ,the season of the ,jewish year1 which we are now approaching1 naturally leads us to the consideration of some subjects more important than those which we have lately discussed1 the oral law teaches that the festival of the new year is nothing less than a day of judgment1 on which ,god pronounces sentence respecting the state of every individual3 1 1 8,as the merits and the sins of a man are weighed at the hour of his death1 so likewise every year1 on the festival of ,new ,year's ,day1 the sins of every one that cometh into the world are weighed against his merits4 ,every one who is found righteous is sealed to life4 ,every one who is found wicked is sealed to death4 ,but the judgment of the intermediate class is suspended until the ,day of ,atonement4 ,if they repent1 they are sealed to life1 but if not1 they are sealed to death40 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 iii4 #c47 ,this naturally leads us to consider the rabbinic doctrine of justification1 and to inquire how far it agrees with ,moses and the prophets4 ,and here our first business must be to state the doctrine as it is found in the oral law4 ,this law teaches1 first1 that he whose merits are more than his sins is accounted a righteous man3-- 1 1 1 8,every one of the children of many has merits and sins4 ,if his merits exceed his sins1 he is righteous4 ,if his sins exceed his merits1 he is wicked4 ,if they be half and half1 he is a middling or intermediate person40 7,ibid4 #a47 ,it teaches1 secondly1 that in estimating the comparative state1 respect is had not only to the number but to the quality of the actions3-- 1 1 1 8,and this weighing is made1 not with respect to the number of the merits and the sins1 but according to their greatness4 ,there is a merit which may outweigh many sins1 as it is said1 #8,because in him there is found some good thing4' 7#a ,kings xiv4 #ac47 ,and there are sins which may outweigh many merits1 for it is said1 #8,one sinner destroyeth much good4'0 7,ecclesiast4 ix4 #ah47 ,it teaches1 thirdly1 that it is possible by transgression or obedience to turn the scale3-- 1 1 8,if a man sin one sin1 he gives the preponderance for himself and for all the world to the scale of guilt1 and causes destruction4 ,but if he perform one commandment1 he gives the preponderance both for himself and all the world to the scale of merit1 and causes salvation and deliverance to himself and them1 as it is said1 #8,the righteous is the foundation of the world' 7,prov4 x4 #be71 which means that righteousness gives the world a preponderance in the scale of merit and delivers it4 ,and on this account all the house of ,israel are accustomed to abound in almsgiving1 and in good deeds1 and to be diligent in the commandments in the interval between ,new ,years ,day and the ,day of ,atonement more than in all the year besides40 7,ibid4 #d47 ,this then is the doctrine which we have to consider4 ,the first great principle is that 8,every one of the children of men has merits and has sins40 ,that every man has sins we readily admit2 but that any man1 or any angel1 or any of ,god's creatures1 has any merit in the sight of ,god we deny4 ,first1 because the idea of merit is utterly inconsistent with the idea of the relation in which the creature stands to the ,creator4 ,every created being is bound by the very fact of his creation to love ,god with all his heart and soul1 and mind and strength1 and to do all his will4 ,whatsoever1 therefore1 he does1 he can never exceed the limit of his bounden duty1 and can therefore never lay any claim to merit4 ,if created beings were free from all obligation to love ,god or to do his will--if they were independent and masters of themselves1 then by loving ,god or doing his will they might have merit1 for they would be doing him a service which ,he has no right to require4 ,just as a man that is free may hire himself to do work for another man1 which he is not bound to do1 and thereby earn wages4 ,but not so the slave1 who is his maker's property4 ,he can only do his duty1 and if he toil all the day and be diligent and faithful in his master's service1 he still can lay no claim to wages or to merit2 he has only done what he is bound to do4 ,to lay any claim to merit1 we must stand on equal terms1 and confer what the other has no right to expect4 ,but this no created being can ever do4 ,he is a debtor overwhelmed with such an amount of debt1 that all that he has or can raise only goes in part payment1 and who therefore will never be able to confer anything which is not already due4 ,and therefore it is said1 8,can a man be profitable unto ,god80 and again1 8,is it gain to him1 that thou makest thy ways perfect80 7,job xxii4 #b1 #c47 ,the unfallen angels themselves have no merit before ,god1 and much less fallen and rebellious man4 ,but1 secondly1 the assertion that man has merits is contradicted by the plain testimonies of ,scripture4 ,if man have merits1 however few1 then so far as those merits are concerned1 his nature must be good and holy1 but ,god declares the contrary3 8,behold1 he putteth no trust in his saints2 yea the heavens are not clean in his sight3 how much more abominable and filthy is man1 which drinketh iniquity like water40 7,job xv4 #ae1 #af47 ,such language cannot be applied to any creature capable of meriting anything in the sight of ,god4 ,again1 if man have merits1 his merits must proceed from the good things which he has done4 ,he that does nothing good cannot be meritorious1 but yet ,god says1 8,there is none that doeth good1 no1 not one4 ,they are all gone aside1 they are all together become filthy2 there is none that doeth good1 no1 not one40 7,ps4 xiv4 #a-c47 ,if this be true1 then no man has merits4 ,if man have merits1 they must proceed from an inherent good principle in his nature1 but ,god says even of ,israel that were is no such principle of good3 on the contrary1 he declares that 8the whole head is sick1 and the whole heart faint4 ,from the sole of the foot1 even unto the head1 there is no soundness in it3 but wounds1 and bruises1 and putrefying sores40 7,isaiah i4 #e1 #f47 ,here ,god describes ,israel1 and the description is generally true of mankind1 as totally corrupt4 ,there is no soundness in it4 ,the intellect is corrupt1 for 8the whole head is sick40 ,the affections are corrupt1 for 8the whole heart is faint40 ,how1 then1 can he that has a perverted intellect and a corrupt heart have merits8 ,again1 if man have merits1 his good deeds1 whatever they be1 must be such as to deserve the approbation of ,god2 but the confession of the prophet is-- 8,but we are all as an unclean thing1 and all our righteousness as filthy rags40 7,isa4 lxiv4 #f47 ,either1 then1 the oral law or the ,bible says what is false4 ,the ,bible says that the very best of man's deeds1 8all his righteousnesses10 are no better in the sight of ,god than filthy rags3 if this be true1 then man has no merit whatsoever4 ,but again1 the assertion that every man has merits and sins1 is based upon a false principle4 ,it takes for granted that ,god judges men by their individual acts1 and not by the state of their hearts2 that is1 that he judges as we do4 ,when we consider a man's conduct1 we can only look at his acts1 and to us some of them appear good and others bad4 ,in our sight1 therefore1 he may have some merits and some demerits4 ,but ,god looks at the heart1 and sees whether a man loves him or not1 and by the whole habit of his mind and affections judges the man's state and all his actions4 ,we short-sighted creatures judge a man's heart by his actions2 but ,god judges his actions by his heart1 and where the heart is wrong1 he is so far from counting any actions as meritorious1 that he looks upon the whole conduct as one mass of abominable sin4 ,the next assertion of the oral law is1 that 8,if a man's merits exceed his sins1 he is righteous40 ,this pre-supposes1 first1 that a man's merits may exceed his sins2 and asserts1 secondly1 that in this case he is accounted righteous4 ,but where is the man whose 8merits exceed his sins80 ,where is the man who keeps any one of ,god's commandments perfectly8 ,in all our best deeds and efforts there is sin of admixture or of imperfection4 ,often1 when by the help of ,god1 a good thought or an honest intention is conceived in the heart1 before it can be realized in action1 some selfish and unworthy motive associates itself with it1 and spoils the whole4 ,and in every case the obedience is imperfect1 so that all our best acts become occasions of committing sins either of infirmity or imperfection1 and thus our sins are certainly as many as our good deeds1 for each one of them has a sin as its associate4 ,but how many are our sins of thought1 word1 and deed1 which are mere sins without any admixture of good1 and which in themselves are 8more than the hairs of our head80 ,and even if we should admit that the final result depends not upon number1 but upon magnitude1 then there is one sin that extends from the moment of our birth to the latest hour of our existence1 and that is1 want of perfect love to ,god4 ,this he requires at every moment1 but yet how many hours of every day do we pursue our business or our pleasures without a single remembrance of him8 ,and how few1 how hasty1 and how interrupted are our grateful recollections of the love and mercy of ,god6 ,here then is a sin which in magnitude far exceeds the aggregate of all our gratitude and all our services1 and which in itself would sink the scale of guilt down to the lowest hell4 ,but by the side of it there is another equally immense1 and that is our continued transgression of the commandment1 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself40 ,the very best of all ,god's saints makes1 at the most1 but a feeble struggle against the love of self4 ,he admits the extent of his duty to his neighbour1 he knows it--he desires to fulfil it4 ,he watches against himself1 and yet with all his care1 self-love creeps in again and again1 and asserts the mastery over his thoughts and actions4 ,these two sins would outweigh a thousand times all the six hundred and eleven remaining commandments of which ,israel boasts1 even if they kept them all without a single transgression or a shade of imperfection4 ,with these two sins on our consciences1 it is perfectly absurd to talk of our merits exceeding our sins4 ,there is not1 and never was in the world1 a mere child of ,adam1 whose sins did not for exceed his good deeds4 ,if1 therefore1 it be necessary1 in order to be accounted just1 that our merits should exceed our sins1 we must give up all hope of being justified before ,god4 ,but let us suppose for a moment that such a thing were possible1 that there was a man whose merits exceeded his sins1 would such an one be accounted just before ,god8 ,first let us ask ,moses1 let us hear what he says4 ,does he promise that if your merits exceed your sins1 ye shall be considered just8 and does he promise life1 as the oral law does1 to imperfect obedience8 ,hear the words of ,moses himself3-- 1 8,ye shall observe to do therefore as the ,lord your ,god hath commanded you3 ye shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left4 ,ye shall walk in ,,all the ways which the ,lord your ,god hath commanded you1 that ye may live1 and that it may be well with you1 and that ye may prolong your days in the land which ye shall possess40 7,deut4 v4 #cb1 #cc47 ,here ,moses requires perfect obedience as the condition of life1 and does not allow a single deviation either to the right hand or to the left4 ,it is not a single declaration1 nor a sentiment wrested from its context4 ,moses repeats the same again and again4 ,in the very next verses to those just quoted1 he says-- 1 8,now these are the commandments1 the statutes1 and the judgments1 which the ,lord your ,god commanded to teach you1 that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it2 that thou mightest fear the ,lord they ,god1 to keep ,,all his statutes and his commandments1 which ,i command thee2 thou and thy son1 and thy son's son1 all the days of thy life3 and that thy days may be prolonged40 7vi4 #a1 #b47 ,here again ,moses requires perfect obedience to the whole law4 ,he requires it of every individual of ,israel4 8,thou and thy son1 and thy son's son20 and this universal obedience he exacts not at some stated period of the year1 but every day of a man's whole life4 8,all the days of thy life40 ,moses leaves no room for some merits and some sins4 ,if a man does what ,moses requires1 he can have no sins4 ,if a man have any sins whatever1 he does not fulfil what ,moses requires as the condition of life4 ,we might quote several other similar passages1 but content ourselves with one1 where ,moses expressly declares that universal obedience is necessary to righteousness3-- 1 8,and the ,lord commanded us to do ,,all these statutes1 to fear the ,lord our ,god always1 that he might preserve us alive1 as it is at this day4 ,and it shall be our righteousness1 if we observe to do ,,all these commandments before the ,lord our ,god1 as he hath commanded us40 7,deut4 vi4 #bd1 #be47 ,this is ,moses' idea of righteousness1 and if ,moses be right the oral law is wrong4 ,it says1 8,if a man's merits exceed his sins1 he is righteous40 ,moses says1 ,if a man keep all the commandments all the days of his life he is righteous4 ,the oral law promises life to him who confessedly has sins4 ,moses requires perfect and universal obedience as the condition of life4 ,it becomes1 therefore1 an important1 an awfully important1 consideration for every ,israelite1 whether he will rest his soul's salvation on the word of ,moses1 or on that of the oral law4 ,if he rests upon the oral law1 than he will be satisfied that a partial obedience is sufficient to secure everlasting salvation1 and in this hope he will die4 ,but if he is to be judged according to the law of ,moses1 he will1 at the hour of ,god's judgment1 find himself awfully mistaken4 ,moses knows of no righteousness1 but that of universal obedience every day of a man's life1 and promises life to none but those who have this righteousness4 ,he that has it not1 therefore1 must be condemned4 ,and let every ,israelite mark well that ,moses has not left us to draw this just conclusion from the premises which he has laid down1 but has himself stated1 in the distinctest and plainest terms1 ,that he who does not yield this universal obedience is accursed4 ,and that no man may mistake his meaning1 he sums up all that he has said upon this subject1 and repeats1 that he who keeps ,,all ,god's commandments shall be blessed1 and that he who does not keep ,,all ,god's commandments shall be accursed3-- 1 8,and it shalt come to pass1 if thou shalt hearken diligently unto the voice of the ,lord thy ,god1 to observe and to do ,,all his commandments which ,i command thee this day1 that the ,lord thy ,god will set thee high above all nations of the earth2 and all these blessings shall come on thee10 c4 ,and then1 after enumerating the blessings1 he adds-- 1 8,but it shall come to pass1 if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the ,lord thy ,god1 to observe to do ,,all his commandments and his statutes which ,i command thee this day1 that all these curses shall come upon thee1 and overtake thee4 ,cursed shalt thou be in the city1 and cursed shalt thou be in the field10 c4 7,deut4 xxviii4 #a-ae47 ,here ,moses plainly says1 that he who is perfectly obedient is blessed1 and that he who is not perfectly obedient is cursed4 ,and it is to be noted that ,moses knows nothing of an intermediate state of man1 the who are neither righteous nor wicked4 ,he divides all ,israel into two classes1 the blessed and the cursed4 ,he who keeps ,,all ,god's commandments belongs to the former2 he who does not keep ,,all ,god's commandments to the latter4 ,in this matter1 than1 the most important that can employ the mind of man1 the oral law contradicts the plain words of ,moses4 ,one of the two is certainly in error4 ,it is for the ,israelites to choose whether they will believe ,moses1 or that oral law which contradicts his words4 ,if they believe in ,moses1 then no one is accounted just before ,god1 but that man who has all the days of his life kept all ,god's commandments without one deviation4 ,every other person is so far from being just1 that he is accursed4 ,if there were a human being who had all his life kept all the commandments1 and only once been guilty of transgression1 that one transgression makes him unjust and accursed4 ,but there is no such person4 ,every man's conscience tells him that his sins far exceed his obedience1 and therefore if ,moses speak truth he is accursed4 ,oh1 let no one endanger his salvation by trusting to the oral law4 ,let him take up the law of ,moses1 let him investigate the conditions which ,moses lays down4 ,we ask not now1 that the ,israelites should read the ,new ,testament1 or that they should listen to our arguments or any reasoning of man4 ,we simply point out to them the words of ,moses1 and we show other passages of the oral law which teaches an entirely different doctrine4 ,we ask1 then1 whether the man who rebels against the law of ,moses can hope for salvation8 ,yet this is what every one who follows the oral law is doing4 ,if his temporal welfare only were concerned1 it would not be of such moment4 ,but here his eternal interests are at stake4 ,if the oral law be mistaken1 and mistaken it is if ,moses spoke truth1 their eternal salvation is forfeited by every one who follows it4 ,we therefore entreat every reader of this paper to take up the law of ,moses1 and to investigate this question3--8,what are the conditions of blessing and cursing1 of life and death1 according to the declarations of ,moses8 ,does he promise life to that man whose merits exceed his sins1 or does he require universal obedience80 ,to ,moses himself we appeal1 and him we constitute the arbiter of our differences4 ,no4 ,,xxxiii4 ,,new ,,year1 ,,continued4 ,we showed in our last number that the first axiom of the4 oral law respecting the mode of justification is false4 ,moses requires perfect and universal obedience to all the commandments as the condition of justification and life1 whereas the oral law says it is sufficient if a man's merits exceed his sins4 ,one of the two1 then1 has spoken falsehood4 ,it is for the ,jews to consider which of them they will brand with the character of liar4 ,as for ourselves1 we believe that ,moses spoke the truth1 and by his standard of right and wrong we proceed to examine the second and third principles of ,rabbinic justification4 ,the oral law tells us1 further1 that when ,god weighs the merits and the offences1 8,this weighing is made not with respect to the number of the merits and the sins1 but according to their greatness4 ,there is a merit which may outweigh many sins1 as it is said1 #8,because in him there is found some good thing4' 7#a ,kings xiv4 #ac47 ,and there are sins which may outweigh many merits1 for it is said1 #8,one sinner destroyeth much good4' 7,ecclesiast4 ix4 #ah470 ,and for this reason we are told that 8,in the ten days between the ,new ,year and the ,day of ,atonement1 ,israel abounds in almsgiving and good works more than in all the year besides40 ,such is the hope which the oral law holds out to ,israel4 ,it first tells a man1 that if his merits exceed his sins1 he is safe4 ,then feeling that none but a fool or madman can dream of his merits exceeding his sins1 it tries to quiet the conscience by assuring the guilty1 that the quality of the deeds is regarded more than their number1 and that there may be one meritorious act which will outweigh many sins4 ,it endeavours to prove this by a citation from the ,book of ,kings4 ,this is in itself suspicious4 ,why did it not bring one or more plain passages from the ,books of ,moses8 ,they contain the law of ,god1 and the great principles of ,god's judgment4 ,in determining a case like this1 an appeal to the letter of the law is absolutely necessary4 ,let every ,israelite1 then1 before he trusts his salvation to the oral law1 find out one passage in the law of ,moses1 where ,moses himself declares that 8one merit may outweigh many sins40 ,we know not of one similar declaration1 and therefore hesitate not to say1 that whosoever rests his salvation on this hope1 has apostatized from the religion of ,moses4 ,but the passage itself1 which the oral law cites1 proves nothing in support of the above principle4 ,the words were spoken of the son of ,jeroboam4 8,he only of ,jeroboam shall come to the grave1 because in him there is found some good thing towards the ,lord ,god of ,israel in the house of ,jeroboam40 7#a ,kings xiv4 #ac47 ,there is not one word said here about his being justified by that one good thing1 whatever it was4 ,it did not save the child from his sickness4 ,it did not change the sentence of death into life4 ,all it did was to procure him a peaceable burial4 ,how1 then1 can any reasonable man argue1 because the son of ,jeroboam had a peaceable burial1 that therefore some meritorious act will save him from the punishment due to his offences8 ,to warrant such a conclusion1 he ought first to show that the son of ,jeroboam had been a grievous sinner like his father1 which the ,bible does not say2 and1 secondly1 that this one meritorious act had obtained pardon of his sins1 and restored him to life2 and moreover it ought to be expressly said1 that ,god considered him as just4 ,the very circumstance that the rabbies were obliged to have recourse to such a passage1 and that they could find nothing better in the law or the prophets1 shows that they were hard pushed to find anything that would even bear a faint resemblance to their doctrine4 ,the law of ,moses gives no countenance to this doctrine1 and can give none1 because it is directly subversive of all the principles of law and justice4 ,the stern principle of justice is1 that every transgression of the law should be followed by punishment without any reference whatever to the good deeds or merits of the transgressor4 ,even before an earthly tribunal1 there is no deviation from this principle4 ,if a murderer or a robber be convicted1 no degree of previous or subsequent merit can be listened to as a plea against the just sentence of the law4 ,he may in all other respects be an unexceptionable character1 he may feed the poor and clothe the naked1 and give all his goods in alms1 but none of these things can change the sentence of guilty into not guilty1 or cause him to be considered as a just or innocent person4 ,and shall we suppose that ,god is less just than man8 ,the law of ,moses gives us no reason for such a supposition4 ,it says distinctly-- 8,moreover1 ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer1 which is guilty of death2 but he shall surely be put to death40 7,num4 xxxv4 #ca47 ,according to this declaration1 the good deeds or merits of a murderer are not to be regarded1 and there is nothing which he can do which can avert the sentence of the law4 ,and shall we suppose that ,god himself will do what he forbids men to do8 ,if so1 why did he forbid it to be done8 ,the plain reason of this prohibition is1 because it is contrary to the eternal principles of right and wrong1 which ,god himself cannot violate without detracting from his holiness4 ,but it is not with respect to murder only that ,god has laid down these stern principles of justice4 ,he says generally-- 1 8,but the soul that doeth ought presumptuously1 whether he be born in the land1 or a stranger1 the same reproacheth the ,lord1 and that soul shall be cut off from among his people4 ,because he hath despised the ,lord1 and hath broken his commandment1 that soul shall utterly be cut off2 his iniquity shall be upon him40 7,numb4 xv4 #cj1 #ca47 ,there is here no promise that his merits shall be weighed against his offences4 ,one presumptuous sin will outweigh all his supposed merits1 and for that one he shall die in his iniquity4 ,the doctrine of the prophets is just the same3-- 8,the soul that sinneth it shall die40 8,but when the righteous turneth away from this righteousness1 and committeth iniquity1 and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth1 shall he live8 ,all his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned3 in his trespass that he hath trespassed1 and in his sin that he hath sinned1 in them shall he die40 7,ezek4 xviii4 #bj-be47 ,when one reads this passage1 it appears as if ,god had dictated it on purpose to contradict the doctrine of the oral law4 ,there is here no mention of weighing merits against sins1 and no promise that some few extraordinary merits may outweigh many sins4 ,on the contrary1 it is distinctly stated1 that when the righteous man turneth away from his righteousness1 8,all his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned40 ,if this be true1 the doctrine of the oral law is necessarily and totally false4 ,but some one may object that there is a similar declaration made respecting the wicked3-- 1 8,but if the wicked man will turn from all his sins that he hath committed1 and keep all my statutes1 and do that which is lawful and right1 he shall surely live1 he shall not die4 ,all transgressions that he hath committed1 they shall not be mentioned to him1 in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live40 ,but this verse is as strongly against the doctrine of the oral law as the others already cited4 ,in the first place1 it does not say1 that he whose sins exceed his merits is wicked1 but that he who commits sin is wicked4 ,in the second place1 it does not say that1 by causing his merits to exceed his sins1 he can become righteous1 but by turning away1 8from ,,all his sins that he hath committed10 and by keeping 8,,all my statutes40 ,it confirms the doctrine laid down already from the law of ,moses1 that to be righteous in the sight of ,god1 a man must commit no sin1 and keep all ,god's commandments4 ,it therefore directly contradicts the oral law1 and overturns the doctrine that some merits may outweigh many sins4 ,if more proof be needful1 we have it in the case of ,moses himself4 ,very few1 if any1 even of the most devoted friends of the oral law1 can imagine that he has so many merits as ,moses his master2 and yet the merits of ,moses did not outweigh one apparently trifling transgression4 ,because of one sin1 he was sentenced to die with the disobedient generation in the wilderness1 and not permitted to enter into the land of ,israel4 ,if ,moses' merits1 then1 could do nothing for him1 how vain must be the hope of others1 who think that1 by abounding in almsgiving and good works for ten days1 they can turn the scale of ,god's righteous judgment8 ,neither the law nor the prophets know of any intermediate class between the righteous and the wicked4 ,they specify only the two classes1 the righteous and the wicked4 ,those who fulfil all ,god's commandments belong to the one1 and those who transgress any of ,god's commandments belong to the other4 ,let every man1 then1 examine his own heart and life1 and it will not require much time nor trouble to ascertain to which class he belongs4 ,a very little reflection will convince him that he has been1 and is1 a transgressor of ,god's commandments2 that he has no merits and no righteousness2 and therefore belongs to that class of whom ,moses says1 that they are accursed4 ,such a conclusion may appear dreadful1 and so it ought to be2 but the grand question is1 ,is it true8 ,let every man ask himself1 8,have ,i kept1 or do ,i keep1 ,,all ,god's commandments80 ,if he can say1 ,yes3 then1 according to the law of ,moses1 he is righteous1 and has the promise of life4 ,but if he must say1 ,no3 then he is unrighteous1 and the curse of ,god is hanging over him1 ready to descend and destroy him3-- 8,cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them4 ,and all the people shall say1 ,amen40 7,deut4 xxvii4 #bf47 ,moses holds out no nope1 except to those who yield a perfect and universal obedience4 ,but some one will reply1 if this be true1 then no man can be accounted righteous1 on account of his deeds3-- 8,for there is not a just man upon earth1 that doeth good1 and sinneth not40 7,eccles4 vii4 #bj47 ,and this is the truth1 no man can be justified because of his good works4 ,we must renounce all our pride1 and appear at the bar of ,god as miserable sinners1 looking only for mercy1 and not for payment4 ,we must come to the same conclusion as ,job did-- 1 8,i know it is so of a truth3 but how should man be just with ,god8 ,if he will contend with him1 he cannot answer him one of a thousand40 7,job ix4 #b1 #c47 ,job had no idea that his merits exceeded his sins1 but knew well that if ,god entered into judgment with him1 he could not answer respecting even the thousandth part of his transgressions4 ,david1 the man after ,god's own heart1 had the same conviction1 and had therefore1 no wish that his merits should be weighed with his sins4 ,his prayer was-- 8,enter not into judgment with thy servant3 for in thy sight shall no man living be justified40 7,ps4 cxliii4 #b47 ,and when ,daniel prayed1 he did not venture to prefer his petitions on the score of merits1 or to expect an answer as the reward of righteousness1 but cast himself simply on the mercy of ,god3 8,for we do not present our supplications before thee for our righteousnesses1 but for thy great mercies40 7,dan4 ix4 #ah47 ,how1 then1 can the modern ,jews hope to stand at the tribunal of a heart-searching ,god1 and not only escape condemnation1 but obtain a reward because their merits exceed their sins8 ,are they more pure than ,job1 more holy than ,david1 more righteous than ,daniel8 or were those three most holy men mistaken1 or ignorant of the way of salvation8 ,certain it is that there must be some mistake somewhere4 ,either the rabbies were right1 and then ,job1 ,david1 and ,daniel were mistaken1 or these three men were right1 and then the rabbies are fearfully and awfully mistaken4 ,if the law requires perfect obedience1 and denounces a curse against all disobedience1 then the former were right in deprecating ,god's judgment1 and casting themselves upon his mercy4 ,but if the law requires only that a man's merits should exceed his sins1 and says that all deficiencies can be made up by almsgiving and good works in the ten days between the ,new ,year and the ,day of ,atonement1 then they were wrong4 ,job was utterly mistaken when he said1 8,how should man be just with ,god80 for the rabbies say1 ,only be careful for the first ten days of the year1 and you will be just and sealed unto life4 ,david was utterly mistaken when he said1 8,in thy sight shall no man living be justified20 for the rabbies say that a man's merits may exceed his sins1 and that such an one is just before ,god4 ,daniel was mistaken in not offering his prayers on the score of righteousness1 but on the plea of mercy4 ,but still1 notwithstanding the certainty with which the rabbies speak1 we would rather trust our own salvation to the word of ,moses1 of ,ezekiel1 of ,job1 ,david1 and ,daniel1 than to that of the rabbies4 ,we would rather kneel as supplicants1 than claim the reward of our deeds with the rabbies4 ,but we cannot pass this subject without observing here also how the religion of the rabbies exhibits itself at every turn as a religion for the rich and the learned1 rather than for the poor and laborious class of mankind4 ,it teaches that almsgiving and good works1 at a certain season of the year1 will turn the wicked into righteous men1 and transform the sinner into the saint4 ,so the rich sinner puts his hand into his pocket1 and lavishes his gold to the poor and needy1 and buys what is wanting to make up his deficit of merit4 ,the learned man sets to work at his books2 for the oral law says3-- 1 8,amongst all the commandments1 there is not one that is equivalent to the study of the law4 ,whereas the study of the law is equivalent to all the commandments3 for study leads to practice4 ,therefore1 study always goes before good deeds40 7,hilchoth ,talmud ,torah47 ,the one with his money1 therefore1 and the other with his books1 can effect a balance in his favour2 but what is to become of the poor labouring classes1 who have no money to buy righteousness1 and no time for study1 which is equivalent to all the other commandments8 ,for them to turn the balance is impossible--they have not the means2 and therefore1 according to the oral law1 they stand but a poor chance when the final account comes to be made up4 ,this of itself would prove that the doctrine of the oral law cannot be true4 ,god is a righteous judge1 and he accepts no man's money and no man's learning4 ,he takes no bribes1 and will not wrest the judgment of the poor4 ,the true mode1 therefore1 of appearing just before ,god1 is some other than that pointed out by the oral law1 and one according to which the poor sinner will stand on equal terms with his rich brother4 ,there is1 however1 another point to which we wish to direct attention4 ,the oral law says1 if a man's merits exceed his sins1 he is just and sealed unto life2 but if his sins exceed his merits1 then he is sealed unto death3 what then are we to think of all who die in each succeeding year8 ,it is plain that they have not been sealed unto life1 for then they could not have died4 ,then they were sealed unto death2 then we must conclude that their sins exceed their merits2 and as all die1 then we must conclude1 further1 that all die in their sins--that their sins are more than their merits2 and so1 after all1 this rabbinical doctrine comes to nothing4 ,it tells a man that by having his merits greater than his sins1 he is righteous1 and will be sealed unto life2 and yet1 after all his almsgiving and good works1 he dies like other men1 and it turns out that he is not a just man1 nor even one of the intermediate class1 but one of the wicked4 ,how can any rational man put his faith in such a system1 which promises a great deal1 but does not keep its promise8 ,above all1 how can he trust his soul's everlasting welfare upon a promise which each successive year proves to be false8 ,many an one has passed into eternity already before the ,new ,year1 and of all such the oral law says they have died in their sins4 ,many more may pass into eternity between the ,new ,year and the ,day of ,atonement4 ,if the oral law be true1 all such belong to the decidedly wicked who did not deserve the ten days' grace4 ,their friends and relations must1 therefore1 stamp their memory with the brand of the impenitently wicked1 or if they entertain a hope that such persons have not died in their sins1 they must declare of the oral law that it is false4 ,if they would have a promise that will not and cannot deceive1 let them take up the law and the prophets4 ,the reader of this paper is still alive1 but who can tell how soon his turn must come1 and come it will1 and that soon in every case4 ,what consolation1 then1 will he have on his dying bed8 ,will he begin to balance his account of merit and sin8 ,alas6 there is no use in that4 ,if the oral law be true1 it was balanced on the last ,day of ,atonement1 and the sins were found to outweigh the merits1 as his approaching death testifies4 ,where then will he flee for refuge or for consolation8 ,in the agony and feebleness of a death-bed hour there is no time for doing good works1 and poverty may cut off the rabbinic hope of purchasing salvation4 ,in the oral law there is no hope4 ,can he find it1 then1 in the law of ,moses8 ,that law requires perfect and universal obedience1 and pronounces the sinner accursed4 ,as an accursed sinner1 then1 he must stand at the bar of ,god1 unless there be some other way and some other hope4 ,when ,jacob was on his death-bed he had another hope4 ,he could say-- 8,i have waited for thy salvation1 ,o ,lord40 7,gen4 xlix4 #ah47 ,oh6 let the reader seek this salvation in time1 that when his last hour comes1 he may be as calm1 as happy1 and as full of hope as his pious forefather4 ,he died in a foreign land1 but he died happy1 trusting not in his own righteousness1 but in the salvation of ,god4 ,he had learned by experience that man cannot deliver himself from mere temporal trouble1 but that even there ,god is his only refuge and his hope1 and still more so in the hour of death and the day of judgment4 ,but he had learned also to believe in the ,angel who had redeemed him from all evil1 and was persuaded that ,he would not forsake him in the great transition from time to eternity4 ,he had not put off the consideration of salvation to the last4 ,he could say1 8,i have waited for thy salvation1 ,o ,lord10 and therefore when the awful moment arrived1 he could in perfect tranquillity gather his children about him1 and tell them of ,shiloh who was to come1 and of the salvation which he had expected4 ,no4 ,,xxxiv4 ,,new ,,year1 ,,continued4 ,all who believe in ,divine ,revelation look forward to a great day1 when the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed1 and a righteous sentence pronounced upon all the sons of men4 ,the most important thing in the world1 then1 for us to know is1 the way of acceptance with ,god1 at that solemn hour4 ,and if men are bound as rational beings to examine the grounds of their opinions and belief on other subjects1 they must be considered as altogether devoid of reason1 who do not thoroughly examine and weigh the doctrines which have been taught them with regard to justification at the bar of ,god4 ,a mistake on other subjects may be endured1 but a mistake here is fatal and irreparable4 ,what will be the horror of those who find that they have through their own want of consideration been trusting in a delusive hope1 and have rejected1 wilfully rejected1 that way of acceptance which ,god has appointed4 ,if there be any one point of difference between ,jews and ,christians1 which requires profound and attentive consideration1 it is this4 ,we ,christians believe that1 on this all-important point1 the oral law is utterly mistaken1 and that all who trust their salvation to the hope which it holds out1 will find themselves awfully mistaken if ,moses and the prophets speak truth4 ,we have endeavoured to show that the hope of justification by merits is contrary to the ,word of ,god4 ,but we shall now proceed to show that the oral law by this doctrine contradicts itself1 and that therefore it is most unsafe to rest our salvation upon any of its assertions4 ,in that law1 which teaches that if a man's merits exceed his sins1 he is justified1 we also find the following parable1 intended to explain ,god's dealings in the judgment of the ,new ,year3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,a parable4 ,there was a certain city1 which owed tribute to the king1 but did not pay it1 whereupon he came upon it with an army to collect it4 ,when he came within ten leagues of it1 the great men of the city went forth to meet him1 and said to him1 ,we have nothing wherewith to pay thee1 so he forgave them one-third4 ,when he approached nearer still1 the middle classes of the city went forth to meet him1 and he forgave them a second-third4 ,when he approached still nearer1 all the population of the city went forth to meet him1 and he forgave them all4 ,the ,king here is the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he4 ,the inhabitants of the city are ,israel1 who accumulate sins all the year4 ,on the eve of the ,new ,year1 the great men fast1 and one-third of their sins is remitted to them4 ,in the ten days1 the intermediate class fast1 and two-thirds are remitted4 ,on the ,day of ,atonement all fast1 and all is remitted to them40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #eha47 ,now this representation is quite at variance with the doctrine that those are justified whose merits exceed their sins4 ,this parable1 in the first place1 represents all as in debt1 and secondly1 that they have nothing to pay1 and thirdly1 that the ,king forgives them freely and for nothing4 ,now this statement is directly contrary to the notion of merit4 ,if a man has more merits than sins1 and is on that score accounted just1 he cannot be said to be in debt1 and he needs no remission4 ,but if it be true of the great men as well as the middle class1 that they are in debt and have nothing wherewith to pay1 then it is certain that they have no merits1 and cannot be considered as just1 but as sinners4 ,merit and forgiveness are as essentially opposed as payment and debt4 ,the man who has paid his creditor all his demands can have no debt1 and so the man who has kept ,god's commands so as to have merit1 needs not forgiveness4 ,but he who has nothing to pay1 that is1 he who has no merits1 must either be condemned1 or he must have a free forgiveness of all2 and this the parable says is the case of ,israel4 ,they have nothing to pay1 and ,god forgives them all4 ,merit is therefore altogether out of the question1 and if this statement be true1 then the doctrine of justification by merits is false1 and therefore the oral law contradicts itself4 ,how then can the ,israelite trust his everlasting welfare to a system at variance with itself8 ,the prayers for the ,new ,year are equally decisive against the doctrine of justification by merits4 ,out of many passages which deny the existence of merit1 and asserts the necessity of a free forgiveness1 we cite the following3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,thousands and ten thousands of congregations1 which have persecuted us and are vanished1 were not able to justify themselves in purity4 ,lo6 the heavens are not pure in his sight1 and all the heavenly angels are as beaten flax3 how then can he that is filthy and abominable be pure8 ,he gathereth riches by deceit2 and working in secret1 he says in his heart1 ,who can bear witness against me before him8 ,even the beams1 rafters1 planks1 and stones of his house4 ,o ,thou who art too pure of sight to view evil1 sink our sins in the deepest recesses1 and work the good sign for us40 7,prayers for the ,new ,year1 p4 #adi47 ,here is an express acknowledgment that the congregations of old could not justify themselves by merit1 an assertion in the words of the ,psalm1 that all men are filthy and abominable1 and a prayer1 not for payment of deserts1 but for forgiveness of sins4 ,if this prayer contain the sentiments of truth1 and be offered in sincerity1 then ,israel has no merits1 and the doctrine1 that any man is justified by the superabundance of his merits1 is a mere fiction4 ,the man who will venture to offer this prayer1 and yet hope to be saved by his good deeds1 is a hypocrite1 or is not right in his mind4 ,here again1 then1 the oral law is inconsistent with itself3 for here it places the hope of salvation not in merit1 but in the free and undeserved mercy of ,god4 ,it is the duty of every ,israelite1 therefore1 to ascertain which of the two ways is in accordance with the declaration of ,moses and the prophets4 ,it is impossible that they should both be true4 ,the fact appears to be1 that the authors of the oral law1 like all other men1 loved the honour and glory of personal righteousness1 and hoped that all those deeds1 and fasts1 and almsgiving1 which were so lovely in their own eyes1 and gained them so much credit amongst men1 would also be duly acknowledged at the bar of ,god's judgment4 ,at the same time their conscience was continually awakened and terrified by the plain declarations of the ,word of ,god1 and therefore1 to quiet their conscience1 they were driven even against their wills to acknowledge their guilt1 and to seek for a quietus4 ,this they partly found in the hope of free mercy1 but partly in inventions of their own4 ,they placed no small dependence upon fasting and almsgiving1 but their troubled conscience was not satisfied with these1 and they have therefore fled for refuge to observances the most trivial1 and hopes the most childish4 ,by blowing the horn the whole month of ,elul1 they hope to deceive ,satan1 so that he may not know which is the first day of the new year1 and may not be able to accuse them3-- 8,therefore our wise men of blessed memory have ordained that the horn should be blown on the first day of the month of ,elul every year1 and during the whole month1 to warn ,israel to repent1 as it is said1 #8,shall a trumpet be blown in the city1 and the people not be afraid8' 7,amos iii4 #f71 and also to confuse ,satan40 ,how can any man of understanding believe that a law teaching such absurdity is from ,god8 ,we are told in ,zechariah and ,job1 that ,satan does accuse the people of ,god3 but how can any one1 who has been taught by the ,word of ,god1 imagine that ,satan is to be deceived by blowing the horn at a wrong time1 or that even if he did not accuse at all1 that ,god is ignorant of man's sins1 or that he will judge unjustly unless he is reminded by ,satan8 ,in accusing sinners1 ,satan gratifies his own malignity1 but his accusation is not wanted at the bar of ,god to convict man of sin4 ,when men appear there they will be seen as they are4 ,all their transgressions will be as visible as is now their bodily presence4 ,the eye of ,god will penetrate every secret recess of the soul1 and the conscience itself will testify and condemn the impenitent4 ,it is therefore most absurd and irrational to hope to escape by confounding the accuser2 and it is to us serious matter of astonishment how such an absurdity could have been tolerated for so many centuries1 and how a people of such intellect as the ,jews confessedly are1 should remain the disciples of such senseless superstition4 ,but the rabbies expect not only to confound ,satan by blowing the horn at the wrong time1 but to obtain ,god's mercy by blowing it at the right time4 ,thus we are told in ,vaijikra ,rabbah-- 8,at the hour in which ,israel take their horns1 and sound before the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 ,he rises from the throne of judgment and sits on the throne of mercy1 as it is written1 #8,the ,lord1 with the sound of the trumpet' 7,ps4 xlvii4 #e72 and he is filled with mercy towards them1 and has pity upon them1 and changes the attribute of judgment which was against them into mercy4 ,when does this happen8 ,in the seventh month40 7,vaijikra ,rabbah1 sect4 #bi47 ,this then is one of the means whereby the rabbies try to quiet a guilty conscience4 ,if true1 it would no doubt be very convenient for a man who has spent the year in iniquity1 and who has not repented1 and does not intend to repent1 to get rid of all his sins by blowing a horn on the new year1 and thus turning ,god's wrath into mercy4 ,but it is a statement altogether opposed to the ,word of ,god1 and derogatory to his character for mercy and for justice4 ,no mere ceremonial act can atone for sin1 neither does ,god need the blowing of a horn to remind him of mercy4 ,to suppose1 that such a miserable ceremony can stop ,god in his course of justice1 and make him reverse his determinations1 is to deprive him of all the attributes of ,deity1 and to represent him as exceeding in imbecility the weakest of all the sons of men that ever occupied the judgment-seat4 ,and yet this most absurd and unscriptural hope is not merely a rabbinic legend1 or an allegory1 but is in the prayers of the synagogue gravely inserted as a devout petition3-- 1 ,the following prayer is said by the person who sounds the cornet1 before he begins3--8,may it be acceptable in thy presence1 ,o ,lord1 my ,god1 and the ,god of my fathers1 the ,god of heaven1 and the ,god of the earth2 the ,god of ,abraham1 the ,god of ,isaac1 and the ,god of ,jacob2 the great ,god1 mighty and tremendous2 to send me the holy and pure angels1 who are faithful ministers1 and faithful in their message2 and who are desirous and willing to justify ,israel2 and also the great angel ,patzpatziah1 who is appointed to present the merits of ,israel1 when they sound the cornet this day2 and likewise the great angel ,tashbach1 who is appointed to declare the merits of ,israel1 and confound ,satan with their sound of the cornet2 and the great princes1 who are appointed over the cornet1 ,enkatham and ,pastam1 and the great angels1 ,hadarniel and ,sandalphon1 who are appointed over our sounding1 who introduce our sounding before the throne of thy glory2 and also the angel ,shamshiel1 who is appointed over the joyful sound2 and the angel ,prasta1 who is appointed to superintend that they may all be expeditious in their errand2 to introduce our soundings before the veil1 and before the throne of thy glory2 and mayest thou be filed with mercy over thy people ,israel2 and lead us within the temperate line of strict justice2 and conduct thyself towards thy children1 with the attribute of mercy1 and suffer our soundings to ascend before the throne of thy glory40 7,prayers for the ,new ,year1 p4 #ha47 ,here1 then1 we have1 in the language of solemn prayer1 the very same monstrous doctrine1 that the sounding of the cornet on the new year can change ,god's determinations2 and we have it in even a more objectionable form1 for it is connected with other most unscriptural superstitions4 ,this prayer asserts what is nowhere found in ,holy ,scripture1 that there is a certain number of angels whose express office it is to superintend the blowing of the horn1 and to bear the soundings thereof before the throne of ,god1 and at the same time to advocate their merits4 ,in the first place1 this is a pure invention1 and a fond superstition4 ,in the ,word of ,god1 not one word is mentioned of anything of the kind4 ,we should be sorry to treat any religious tenet of any people1 but especially of the ,jews1 with ridicule1 but we cannot help asking the good sense of every reader1 whether the representation here given is not in the highest degree ridiculous8 ,the angels are to be sent down from heaven4 ,for what purpose8 ,is it to warn men of the impending wrath of ,god1 or to announce the coming redemption of ,israel1 or to execute ,god's judgments8 ,no1 but to attend to the blowing of a ram's horn1 and to carry up the sounds before the throne of ,god1 that they may turn his attribute of judgment into that of mercy4 ,is it necessary1 then1 for the angels to interfere in this matter8 cannot ,god hear the sounding of the cornet1 unless it be conveyed to him by angels8 or do the movings of his compassion depend upon the blowing of a cornet8 ,what would ,elijah have said to such doctrine as this8 ,when the priests of ,baal only cried aloud1 he mocked them1 and said1 8,cry aloud1 for he is a ,god2 either he is talking1 or he is pursuing1 or he is on a journey1 or peradventure he sleepeth1 and must be awaked40 7#a ,kings xviii4 #bg47 ,and yet the priests of ,baal were not sounding a cornet1 that they might rouse their pretended ,deity to compassion4 ,if we had not read this prayer with our own eyes1 we could scarcely have believed that even ,rabbinism itself could have fallen into such manifest absurdity4 ,but the subject is far too grave to be treated with levity4 ,upon this absurdity1 the rabbies teach ,israel to rest their hope of salvation4 ,conscious that the hope of justification by merit is fallacious1 and yet unwilling to give up what is so palatable to the pride of man1 they seek about to find something that will compensate for the deficiency1 and in the eagerness of desperation grasp at any thing4 ,the trivial ceremony of blowing the cornet was therefore turned into a mystery1 and a suitable apparatus of angels invented to meet the apprehensions of the superstitious and unenlightened1 and in some degree to take off the apparent irrationality of believing that an act so insignificant should effect a change so great in the purposes of the ,almighty4 ,but whatever was the motive or the origin of this fable1 there it now stands in the prayers of the synagogue1 to lead the ignorant away from the true means of justification1 and the true ideas of ,god's justice and ,god's judgment4 ,let no man say it is an innocent error4 ,no error is innocent4 ,error in every form is pernicious2 in religion it is deadly4 ,and the most mischievous of all religious errors are those which confirm men in the idea1 that external ceremonies will atone for moral delinquencies2 and this is precisely the tendency of the fable here noticed4 ,an ignorant and superstitious man1 and there are many such in every religion1 finds in his ,prayer-book that the blowing of the cornet can change the attribute of judgment into the attribute of mercy3 he believes it to be true1 not only because of the book where he finds it1 but because every man is glad to hear of a way of acceptance1 which will save the trouble of repentance and thorough change of heart and life4 ,he therefore perseveres through the year in the practice of those things which his heart condemns1 trusting that the blowing of the cornet will set all straight1 and thus he goes on from year to year until death overtakes him hardened and impenitent1 and he finds too late at the bar of ,god1 that he has been in fatal error4 ,upon whom then will the guilt of such person's destruction be charged8 ,not only upon those who invented the falsehood1 but on those also who sanction it1 who leave it in the ,prayer-book1 and thus practically teach the people superstition4 ,every ,jew who attends the worship of the synagogue is responsible in his station and calling1 for the error and falsehood which its prayers propagate amongst the people4 ,but at all events every person who disbelieves this story of the angels carrying up the sounding of the cornet1 must grant that a system teaching such a method of salvation is very unsafe2 and that1 as it grossly errs in this one article it is suspicious in all4 ,but besides the absurdity of this doctrine1 we must notice its inconsistency4 ,the ,prayer-book states that the blowing of the cornet is necessary to the procuring of pardon2 it therefore implies that pardon is necessary1 and therefore that ,israel is guilty2 what1 then1 becomes of merits8 ,if ,israel can be justified by merits1 the blowing of the cornet is superfluous2 for1 in that case1 all they want is justice4 ,where a man can claim salvation because of all his good deeds1 he need not fear the attribute of righteousness1 1 and does not want the attribute of mercy4 ,but the moment that he acknowledges his need of forgiveness1 he confesses that he has no merits4 ,if1 therefore1 the ,prayer-book be right in acknowledging sin and praying for pardon1 the oral law is wrong in teaching justification by merits4 ,one contradicts the other1 and therefore they cannot both be from ,god2 and the man who believes both is guilty of renouncing his reason4 ,but the man who trusts his salvation to a system so inconsistent with itself1 is utterly devoid of wisdom4 ,he is hazarding his eternal welfare on the testimony of a witness who contradicts himself2 who says at one time1 that a man can be saved by his merits1 and at another time that he has no merits that can stand the scrutiny of ,god's righteous judgment4 ,no4 ,,xxxv4 ,,justification4 ,the doctrine of justification by merits is agreeable1 and seems very reasonable1 so long as a man can theorize1 that is1 so long as he is not in earnest4 ,but so soon as the prospect of death1 or any other similar circumstance1 compels him to realize the act of ,divine judgment upon himself1 it loses all its beauty and plausibility2 the conscience is unsatisfied by its consolations1 and reason pronounces that the hope built on merits is insecure4 ,a solemn and earnest review of our past years soon convinces1 that our good deeds are but few1 that our best deeds are defiled by mixed motives2 and1 above all1 that the love of ,god has not been the heart's dominant principle1 and that1 therefore1 some other mode of justification is absolutely necessary4 ,the truth of this statement is confirmed by the inconsistency of the oral law with itself4 ,the great principle of the oral law is1 that the observance of any one of its commands1 purchases a certain quantity of merit1 and that an accumulation of these merits will1 at last1 constitute a sufficiency2 but when the solemn season of the ,new ,year and the ,day of ,atonement arrives1 this sufficiency is found to be insufficient1 and the alarmed conscience eagerly looks round to find something1 that may compensate for the deficiency of merit4 ,we have already noticed some of the rabbinic inventions for this purpose1 and now proceed to consider another1 and that is1 the merit of their progenitors4 ,one of the main props of rabbinic hope is the righteousness of their forefathers1 as may be seen almost on every page of the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 and as is apparent in the following extracts3-- 1 1 1 1 1 8,she who was sorrowful when barren1 was made to rejoice with good tidings when ninety years of age2 she then sent forth shoots that failed not4 ,regard the merit of your ancestors who were born on this day1 and the three barren ones1 who were visited on this day3 justify1 through their righteousness1 those who hope in thee1 ,o ,thou1 who art tremendous40 7,levi's ,prayer for the ,new ,year1 p4 #fa47 ,and again-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,the fearful day of visitation is come1 its dread goads all flesh2 they present themselves with bended knees2 ,o may their repentance be accounted as a burnt-offering4 ,thou who hast formed them judgest all their thoughts3 the rich and poor are all weighed in the balance2 remember the merit of him who said1 #8,shall he not do justice8' ,o1 remember the tenor of his prayer in judgment4 ,ere ought was created didst thou purpose to ordain him the rock from whence the nation was to spring2 he was as the centre1 the support of all creatures4 ,his wife was on this day endued with youth1 to cause the branch to put forth at ninety years of age2 she was appointed as a sign to those who are likened to the rose1 who are to pass before thee in judgment on this ,new ,year's-day4 ,her posterity tremble this day2 when they stand before thy terrible throne2 they utter the voice of prayer this day2 they assemble to sound the cornet1 that they may obtain redemption4 ,they depend on her merit to be visited like her2 their assemblies cry aloud and hasten to enter into thy doors4 ,they depend on the ashes of him who was bound as a lamb1#cj with whom she was visited in the month ,tishri40 7,ibid41 p4 #eg47 ,the offering of ,isaac is regarded as particularly meritorious1 and constantly urged as a plea for merit4 ,thus-- 8,attentively view the ashes of ,isaac1 heaped upon the altar2#ca and remember this day unto his seed1 his being bound on the altar40 7,ibid41 p4 #ha47 ,and again-- 1 1 8,they depend on the righteousness of the first patriarch1 and rest on the merit of the only peculiar ,son1 and are secure in the perfection and rectitude of the father of the nation40 7,ibid41 p4 #aje47 ,these passages show plainly that1 after all1 the rabbies felt their own doctrine of justification by merits very unsafe ground on which to build their hope of salvation2 and that they were glad to flee to merits more adequate1 which they hoped to find in the righteousness of their ancestors4 ,the modern ,jews1 who still adopt these prayers1 profess to entertain the same hope1 and we therefore proceed to inquire1 whether it be built on a better foundation than that which they are compelled to relinquish4 ,we think that it is not2 for1 in the first place1 the saints of old1 ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 though we revere them as pious and holy men1 were after all only sinful men like ourselves4 ,they did not1 and could not1 save themselves by their own righteousness1 and if they did not save themselves1 it is folly to think that they can save us4 ,abraham1 though by the grace of ,god1 the father of the faithful1 was yet in himself so weak in faith1 and so distrustful in the goodness and mercy of ,god1 as to endeavour to save himself from the ,egyptians by means of a deliberate falsehood4 ,sarah had so little faith as to laugh within herself at the promise of ,god1 and then to defend herself by a lie4 ,isaac was guilty of similar conduct1 and ,jacob's sin in deceiving his brother plainly shows1 that he also was a poor sinful creature4 ,where then are their superabundant merits1 whereby they are to justify all their posterity8 ,the ,word of ,god says expressly1-- 8,no man can by any means redeem his brother1 nor give to ,god a ransom for him40 7,ps4 xlix4 #h47 ,how then are these three men to redeem all their posterity8 ,if they have got merits sufficient to compensate for the unrighteousness of their children1 then they have a ransom2 and then the ,word of ,god1 which says that no man has a ransom1 is not true4 ,but if the words of the ,psalm be true1--and he is no ,jew who thinks them false1--then the patriarchs have no superabundant merits1 and no ransom to offer for their children1 and then the hope built on their righteousness is deceitful1 and those that lean on it will find themselves mistaken in the hour of judgment4 ,nay1 more1 they will find themselves accursed for departing from the ,lord4 ,he that trusts in the righteousness of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 to deliver him from the wrath to come1 is evidently trusting in man1 and making flesh his arm4 ,if the merits of the patriarchs can save their children from the wrath of ,god1 then ,god is not the ,saviour of ,israel1 but the patriarchs are ,israel's redeemers1 and poor mortal men are their hope and their trust3 but the ,prophet says1-- 8,cursed be the man that trusteth in man1 and maketh flesh his arm1 and whose heart departeth from the ,lord40 7,jer4 xvii4 #e47 ,so far1 then1 from being secure by trusting in the righteousness of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 this trust increases the sinner's guilt1 and draws down upon him a double curse4 ,but it has pleased ,god himself to argue this question at large with the ,jews1 to suppose the case of a righteous father who has an unrighteous son1 and to declare that the son cannot be saved by the righteousness of the father4 ,in the ,prophet ,ezekiel1 ,god says1 8,if a man be just1 and do that which is lawful and right--he is just1 he shall surely live1 saith the ,lord ,god4 ,if he beget a son that is a robber1 a shedder of blood1 and that doeth the like to any of these things1 and that doeth not any of those duties1 but even hath eaten upon the mountains1 and defileth his neighbour's wife1 hath oppressed the poor and needy1 hath spoiled by violence1 hath not restored the pledge1 and hath lifted up his eyes to the idols1 hath committed abomination1 hath given forth upon usury1 and hath taken increase3 shall he then live8 he shall not live3 he hath done all these abominations3 he shall surely die2 his blood shall be upon him40 7,ezek4 xviii4 #e-ac47 ,here ,god sets the matter at rest1 and decides that the righteousness of a father is of no use to an unrighteous son1 and cannot deliver him from the punishment due to his evil deeds4 ,the doctrine1 then1 of justification by the merits of ancestors1 is directly opposed to the plain declaration of ,god himself1 and1 therefore1 in this case also the ,jewish prayers and the oral law teach error1 and seduce the ,jews to their everlasting destruction1 by teaching them to trust in that which can do them no good4 ,it is an awful and melancholy spectacle to see ,god's ancient people thus misled4 ,at this season of the year1 the devout amongst them endeavour to turn to ,god1 fast and pray1 and yet neither the one nor the other is accepted1 because they put their trust in the merits of men1 and their heart is turned away from ,god their ,saviour4 ,the prayers of the synagogue1 instead of drawing down a blessing1 only help to accumulate wrath1 by seducing them from the ,redeemer of ,israel to refuges of lies4 ,and hence it happens that all the fasts and the prayers of ,israel for these seventeen centuries have been disregarded by ,god1 and that ,israel still continues in captivity4 ,but as every lie and every error is built upon some truth as its foundation1 it will be well to inquire what truth it was that gave rise to this error of justification by the merits of ancestors8 ,the principle is that the guilty may be saved by the merits of another person1 who is righteous3 how1 then1 did this principle become current among the ,jews8 ,it was certainly not the invention of human reason1 for reason can discover no necessary connexion between the merits of one righteous man and the pardon of another who is guilty4 ,the principle does not hold in the ordinary judicial proceedings of this world3 a robber or a murderer is not and cannot be pardoned because another member of the community1 or of his family1 is a good and righteous man4 ,we must therefore look elsewhere for the origin of the principle1 and we find it in the revealed will of ,god4 ,we see it in the appointment of sacrifice and atonement1 according to which a guilty man was pardoned by the suffering of an innocent animal4 ,here is at once the principle of substitution of the innocent for the guilty2 and human reason1 when it once has the substratum1 can easily proceed to erect the superstructure4 ,in the present case it naturally argued1 if the death of one of the brute creation could effect so much1 how much more would the merits of a righteous man avail1 if such an one could be found8 ,the error1 then1 is not in the principle1 but in its application4 ,according to the ,scripture1 it is true that the innocent may be substituted for the guilty2 but the rabbies were wrong in applying this truth to the case of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 ,jacob1 and other men1 who were only sinners as themselves4 ,the ,word of ,god1 which gave the principle1 also directs us to the right application4 ,it tells us of one for whose righteousness' sake the ,lord will forgive sin3-- 8,the ,lord is well pleased for his righteousness' sake2 he will magnify the law and make it honourable40 7,isa4 xlii4 #ba47 ,who1 then1 is this person8 ,the preceding verses tell us that it is the servant of the ,lord4 ,who1 then1 is the servant of the ,lord8 ,kimchi says1 on this verse1 that the servant of the ,lord is the prophet2 but this cannot possibly be true1 for the prophet was not righteous1 but a sinner1 as he himself tells us in the sixth chapter--8,i am a man of unclean lips40 ,the servant mentioned in the nineteenth verse is the same person as he who is called 8,my servant10 in the first verse of the chapter--8,behold my servant1 whom ,i uphold1 mine elect1 in whom my soul delighteth3 ,i have put my spirit upon him3 he shall bring forth judgment to the ,gentiles40 ,but here ,kimchi says1-- 8,this is the ,king ,messiah1 as we have interpreted40 ,if then1 in the first verse1 8,the servant of the ,lord0 means the ,messiah1 it must mean the same through the chapter1 and the ,messiah is the person for whose righteousness' sake the ,lord is well pleased4 ,this same prophet tells us again1 concerning this servant1-- 8,by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many2 for he shall bear their iniquities40 7,isa4 liii4 #aa47 ,that the ,messiah is here intended no ,jew can doubt1 who uses the ,synagogue ,prayers2 for on the ,day of ,atonement and at the ,passover1 this chapter is applied to him4#cb ,here1 then1 it is expressly stated1 that the ,messiah1 by his righteousness1 shall justify the guilty4 ,and1 therefore1 the prophet calls the ,messiah 8,,the ,,lord ,,our ,,righteousness40 7,jer4 xxiii4 #f47 ,that the ,messiah is here intended there can be no doubt1 for he is described as 8the righteous branch0 of ,david1 and thus all the commentators explain it4 ,in these three passages1 then1 of the ,word of ,god1 sinners are pointed to the ,messiah as their hope and their righteousness4 ,he is ,god's righteous servant1 and his sufferings and his merits are all-sufficient to do that which ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob cannot do4 ,the great mistake of the oral law is to point to wrong persons1 who have no righteousness1 and almost totally to pass by ,him whom ,god hath set forth as the hope of sinners4 ,but it may here be asked1 if ,messiah be a man1 how can he have merits more than ,abraham1 or any other of the children of ,adam8 ,the answer is1 that though very man1 he is not a sinful man as we are1 neither is he a mere man4 ,if he were a man like us1 he could have no merits1 and therefore could not justify us any more than we could justify him4 ,the declaration1 therefore1 that he is the ,lord's righteous servant1 and that he is appointed for the justification of sinners1 necessarily implies that he is more than a man1 and the title given him by the ,prophet ,jeremiah puts this beyond doubt4 ,jeremiah calls him by the incommunicable name of ,god 1 concerning which ,god himself says3-- 8,i am the ,,lord3 that is my name1 and my glory will ,i not give to another40 7,isa4 xlii4 #h47 ,if then be the name of ,god1 then that ,being who is called by that holy name must be ,god4 ,some of the modern rabbies reply1 that this holy name is also given to the city of ,jerusalem1 both by ,jeremiah and ,ezekiel4 ,but even if we admit this1 still this is no answer to our argument4 ,there is no fear that a city which1 however great or noble1 is only a mass of stones and mortar1 should be mistaken for the living ,god1 the ,creator of the ,universe4 ,when1 therefore1 the name of ,god is attributed to the city1 ,god's honour is not given to it4 ,but when we are told of the ,messiah1 first that he is righteous1 secondly that his righteousness is so great as to justify the guilty1 and lastly that his name is 1 8,,the ,,lord our ,righteousness20 that is when we see that the attributes and the name of ,god are attributed to him1 then we must conclude either that he is ,god1 or that ,god has done what he has declared that he would not do1 and given his honour to another4 ,righteousness is the attribute of ,god alone1 and so ,daniel says3-- 8,o ,lord1 righteousness belongeth unto thee1 but unto us confusion of faces1 as at this day40 7,dan4 ix4 #g47 ,but1 in the above passages1 righteousness is said to belong to the ,messiah1 and that in such an immeasurable degree as to be sufficient to justify the guilty sons of men2 if then he have this attribute of ,god1 he must also have the nature of ,god4 ,again1 another prophet says1 that of ,god men will say that they have righteousness in him3-- 8,surely shall one say1 in the ,lord have ,i righteousness and strength4 7,isa4 xlv4 #bd47 ,and again3-- 8,in the ,lord shall all the seed of ,israel be justified1 and shall glory40 ,here it is said that ,god is our righteousness1 and that in ,him we shall be justified2 but in the passages quoted above1 it is said that the ,messiah is our ,righteousness1 and that in ,him we shall be justified2 the person then intended in these different passages must be one and identical4 ,thus the difficulties are all removed1 and we have one in whose righteousness we may safely trust1 without making ourselves liable to the curse denounced against those who put their trust in sinful men4 ,this is the ,christian's hope4 ,many ,jews think1 and speak1 and argue too1 as if ,christians had departed from the living ,god and put their trust in a man2 but that of which they accuse us1 they have done themselves4 ,we have not departed from the living ,god4 ,our hope and trust and confidence is in 1 ,the ,,lord our ,righteousness4 ,you have departed from the ,lord1 for in your prayers you say that your hope and trust is in the merits of sinful men4 ,our confidence is based upon the ,word of ,god1 and your hope is taught you by the rabbies1 who are fallible men4 ,your doctrine is the doctrine of men1 and your hope is in the merits of men4 ,you have1 therefore1 doubly departed from ,god1 both from his word and his righteousness4 ,our desire is that you would return to ,him1 not to us1--to his word1 and not to ours4 ,you have no merits more than we have4 ,your forefathers have no more than either of us1 and the blowing of a ram's horn is but a poor foundation on which to build our hope of salvation2 and yet these are the things on which your rabbies have taught you to depend4 ,examine your prayers1 and compare them with the ,word of ,god1 and you will find1 that as long as the ,jewish nation continues to offer such petitions1 their cry cannot be heard2 and that if they wish for salvation1 they must forsake their arm of flesh1 and return to ,him who was the hope of their fathers4 ,it was not by his own merits1 nor the merits of his forefathers1 nor by any ceremonial observance1 that ,abraham was justified1 but by faith in the ,,lord1 1 as it is written3-- 8,and he believed in the ,,lord1 and it was counted to him for righteousness40 7,gen4 xv4 #f47 ,david the ,king did not expect to be forgiven and justified on account of ,abraham's or his other ancestors' merits2 neither did he say1 ,blessed is the man who puts his trust in the righteousness of the patriarchs1 but-- 1 8,blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven1 whose sin is covered4 ,blessed is the man unto whom the ,,lord imputeth not iniquity1 and in whose spirit there is no guile40 7,ps4 xxxii4 #a47 ,every one1 then1 who desires to have this blessing1 must renounce all pretensions to merit1 and acknowledge himself a sinner needing forgiveness2 and for this forgiveness he must look not to anything that man had done1 or can do1 but to the mercy of ,god in passing by transgression and sin4 ,and therefore the ,prophet ,habakkuk lays it down as a general rule-- 8,the just shall live by his faith40 7,habak4 ii4 #d47 ,this is the ,scriptural mode of justification1 and this the hope of ,abraham1 ,david1 and ,habakkuk4 ,will the ,jews1 then1 cast in their lot with their father ,abraham1 and trust to that way of justification in which he walked8 or will they refuse to be justified as he was1 and still persist in following the inventions of men1 which are not even consistent with themselves8 ,if the oral law pointed out one way of justification1 and then consistently adhered to it1 there would at least be an appearance of reason in following its directions4 ,but it points out two ways as opposite as east and west4 ,it says a man may be justified by his own merits1 and then it tells him he is to be justified by the merits of another4 ,both cannot possibly be true4 ,it is the duty1 then1 of every man earnestly to inquire which is the true way of ,salvation1 and to decide1 whether he is to be saved by his own merits1 or the merits of his forefathers1 or the merits of 8,,the ,,lord ,,our ,,righteousness40 ,footnote #cj3 ,isaac4 ,footnote #ca3 8,alluding to ,isaac's being bound2 and thus considered as if he had been offered1 and his body burnt to ashes on the altar40 7,levi's note47 ,footnote #cb3 ,see the ,machsor for the ,day of ,atonement1 in and for the ,passover1 in 4 ,no4 ,,xxxvi4 ,,day ,,of ,,atonement4 ,the law and the prophets both abound with plain declarations entirely subversive of the rabbinic doctrine of human merit4 ,but it has pleased ,god1 besides these plain and repeated declarations1 to ordain a public and solemn act to instruct even the most ignorant1 and to convince the most obstinate1 that by human merit there is no salvation4 ,he commanded that1 once every year1 an atonement should be made by the high-priest1 for himself1 and for all the people of every class and degree4 8,and he shall make an atonement for the holy sanctuary1 and he shall make an atonement for the tabernacle of the congregation1 and for the altar2 and he shall make an atonement for the priests and for all the people of the congregation40 7,levit4 xvi4 #cc47 ,now this ordinance implies1 that all ,israel1 the high-priest1 the priests1 and the people1 are all sinners1 all need an atonement2 and1 therefore1 utterly annihilates all idea of justification by merits4 ,if ,israel could have been justified either by their own merits1 or by the merits of their forefathers1 the solemn act of annual atonement would have been superfluous4 ,but if this atonement be necessary1--and if it were not1 why did ,god appoint it--then there is no room for the assertion of human merits4 ,but the truth is1 as we have already seen1 that the rabbies felt that their doctrine was insufficient to quiet the awakened conscience1 and gladly fled to any refuge that they could discover2 it is no wonder then that they have clung with uncommon tenacity to the shadow of that hope that was held out in the law of ,moses4 ,in spite of their doctrine of merit1 they are glad to have even the appearance of a day of atonement to reconcile them to the ,almighty4 ,it is true they have no high-priest and no sacrifice1 yet so convinced are they of the need of an atonement1 that rather than confess that they have absolutely none1 they teach that repentance and the day itself will atone for all sin3-- 1 1 1 8,at this time1 when there is no temple1 and we have no altar1 there is no atonement but repentance4 ,repentance atones for all transgressions1 yea1 though a man be wicked all his days1 and repent at last1 none of his wickedness is mentioned to him1 for it is said1 #8,as for the wickedness of the wicked1 he shall not fall thereby1 in the day that he turneth from his wickedness4' 7,ezek4 xxxiii4 #ab47 ,the ,day of ,atonement itself also atones for them that repent1 for it is said1 #8,for on that day he shall make an atonement for you4' ,lev4 xvi4 #cj40 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 i4 #b47 ,this is the last refuge of ,jewish hope1 and we1 therefore1 propose to consider1 whether it is a refuge on which a reasonable man may hazard his hope of salvation8 ,no man of sense would hazard his life or his property upon a statement1 of which one part contradicted the other2 and such is the statement which we have just read4 ,it first tells us1 that in this present time 8,there is no atonement but repentance10 and that 8,repentance atones for all transgressions20 and yet1 immediately after1 it adds1 that 8,the ,day of ,atonement itself atones for them that repent40 ,now the latter assertion contradicts the former4 ,if the ,day of ,atonement1 as is here asserted1 be necessary to atone for the penitent1 then it is not true1 that repentance atones for all sins4 ,but if repentance atones for all sins1 then when a man repents1 his sins are forgiven1 and then the ,day of ,atonement is not necessary4 ,there is here1 therefore1 a palpable contradiction1 and it cannot be safe to trust to a hope at variance with itself4 ,but1 secondly1 as the two parts of which this statement is composed1 contradict each other1 so each of them is contrary to the law of ,moses4 ,the first of them is1 that 8,repentance atones for all transgressions20 but if so1 then the atonement prescribed by ,moses is useless1 in fact1 it is no atonement at all4 ,moses says1 that the two goats were appointed by ,god for the atonement1 but here it is said1 that repentance is1 in itself1 sufficient4 ,if this be true1 if repentance can now atone for sins1 without any sacrifice1 why did ,moses appoint such an useless1 and even cruel rite1 as the taking away the lives of poor innocent animals8 ,if repentance be sufficient now1 it was sufficient always1 and then it follows1 that ,god commanded what was useless4 ,but if the appointment1 the slaying of one goat1 and the sending the other1 laden with the sins of the people1 into the wilderness1 was necessary formerly to procure forgiveness of sins1 it must be equally necessary now3 unless the rabbies will take upon them to assert1 that ,god is an arbitrary and changeable master1 who1 to forgive sins1 at one time1 requires what at another time he does not require4 ,that the slaying of one goat1 and the sending away of the other was once absolutely necessary1 no man can deny4 ,moses prescribes it so plainly1 that if there be one thing more plain than another1 it is this1 that when the ,jews were in their own land1 repentance was not a sufficient atonement for sins4 ,indeed1 ,rambam himself says3-- 8,the goat that was sent away atoned for all the transgressions mentioned in the law1 whether light or grave4 ,whether a man transgressed presumptuously or ignorantly1 consciously or inconsciously1 all was atoned for by the goat that was sent away1 if a man repented4 ,but if a man did not repent1 then the goat atoned only for the light offences40 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 ibid47 ,we do not agree with the whole of this doctrine1 but we cite it to show1 that formerly repentance was not a sufficient atonement for sins1 but that besides repentance1 the goat1 as appointed by ,god1 was also necessary4 ,and we infer1 that as an atonement1 besides repentance1 was once necessary1 it is necessary still1 unless the rabbies will affirm that ,god has changed his mind1 and abrogated the law of ,moses4 ,if repentance without any atonement be now sufficient to procure forgiveness of sins1 then1 beyond all doubt1 the law of ,moses is abrogated or changed4 ,if the law of ,moses be not abrogated and not changed1 then repentance alone cannot atone for sins2 and1 therefore1 this assertion of the oral law is false4 ,but the oral law endeavours to prove its assertion1 by a citation from ,ezekiel1 8,as for the wickedness of the wicked1 he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness40 ,and it might be further urged1 that ,ezekiel here mentions repentance only1 and omits all notice of sacrifice and the ,day of ,atonement4 ,but the answer is easy4 ,either ,ezekiel meant1 in this declaration1 to repeal the law of ,moses1 or he did not4 ,if he meant to repeal the law of ,moses1 then the law is repealed1 and a new way of obtaining forgiveness1 not taught by ,moses1 has been introduced1 and then the whole ,jewish nation is1 on their own showing1 palpably in the wrong in adhering to that which is repealed4 ,but if he did not mean to repeal the law of ,moses1 then he made this assertion with that implied restriction which the law of ,moses required2 that is1 he implied the necessity of sacrifice3 and then this passage does not prove what the oral law asserts4 ,but in every case1 this first assertion is contrary to the law of ,moses4 ,it is1 however1 evident1 that the rabbies themselves were dissatisfied with their own assertion1 for they immediately add to it a second1 8,that the ,day of ,atonement itself atones for them that repent1 as it is said1 #8,for on that day he shall make an atonement for you4'0 ,notwithstanding the confidence of their assertion about repentance1 they did not feel easy without some appearance of an atonement1 and as they had no priest and no victim1 they say1 that the day itself atones1 and endeavour to prove this assertion by a citation from ,moses4 ,but1 unfortunately1 this citation entirely overthrows their assertion4 ,moses does not say3-- 8,this day will atone for you10 but he says3-- 8,on that day he 7the priest7 shall atone for you40 ,moses ascribes no virtue whatever to the day itself1 but only to the rites on that day to be observed1 and the person by whom they were performed4 ,moses prescribes1 first1 a high-priest2 ,secondly1 a goat1 whose blood was brought into the ,holy of holies2 and thirdly1 a goat to be sent away3 so that where these three are wanting1 nay1 where any one of the three is wanting1 the conditions prescribed by ,moses are not fulfilled1 and there is1 therefore1 no atonement4 ,without these three things the day itself has no virtue1 and is nothing different from the commonest day in the year2 and now1 therefore1 as they are all wanting1 ,israel has no atonement4 ,the assertion about the day itself1 is a mere invention of the rabbies1 the only value of which is to show how deeply they felt the insufficiency of repentance1 and the necessity of a real atonement1 in order to procure remission of sins4 ,but the rabbies always betray themselves by adding something to make up for the deficiency1 of which they are sensible4 ,we have seen this in their assertion about merits1 and so we find it here in their assertion about atonement4 ,they assert1 that 8,the ,day of ,atonement itself atones for the penitent10 but in spite of this1 they have felt the need of something more1 which would a little better resemble real sacrificial atonement2 and hence has arisen the custom of sacrificing a cock on the eve of that solemn day4 ,the following account of this custom is given in the 1 of which we have before us an edition published at ,breslau1 so late as the year #ahcj2 and it is selected1 partly on account of its recent publication1 and partly because the directions how to act are given in ,jewish-,german1 which shows that they are intended even for the most illiterate1 and that the custom is not confined to a few speculators1 but is general amongst the people3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,,order ,,of ,,the ,,atonements4--,on the eve of the ,day of ,atonement1 the custom is to make atonements4 ,a cock is taken for a man1 and a hen for a woman2 and for a pregnant woman a hen and also a cock1 on account of the child4 ,the father of the family first makes the atonement for himself1 for the high-priest first atoned for himself1 then for his family1 and afterwards for all ,israel40 ,the order is as follows3 ,he takes the cock in his hand and says these verses3 8,the children of men that sit in darkness and the shadow of death1 being bound in affliction and iron2 he brought them out of darkness and the shadow of death1 and brake their bands in sunder4 ,fools1 because of their transgression1 and because of their iniquities1 are afflicted4 ,their soul abhorreth all manner of meat2 and they draw near unto the gates of death4 ,then they cry unto the ,lord in their trouble2 and he saveth them out of their distresses4 ,he sendeth his word1 and healeth them1 and delivereth them from their destructions4 ,o1 that men would praise the ,lord for his goodness1 and for his wonderful works1 to the children of men8 7,psalm cvii47 ,if there be for him an angel1 an intercessor1 one among a thousand1 to show unto man his uprightness1 then he is gracious unto him1 and saith1 ,deliver him from going down to the pit2 ,i have found a ransom40 7,job xxxiii4 #bc47 ,whilst moving the atonement round his head1 he says1 8,this is my substitute4 ,this is my commutation4 ,this cock goeth to death1 but may ,i be gathered and enter into a long and happy life1 and into peace40 ,he then begins again at the words1 8,the children of men10 and so he does three times4 ,then follow the various alterations that are to be made1 when the atonement is made for a woman or another person1 c41 and is added3-- 8,as soon as one has performed the order of the atonement1 he should lay his hands on it1 as the hands used to be laid on the sacrifices1 and immediately after give it to be slaughtered40 ,this custom1 extensively prevalent amongst the ,jews1 proves abundantly the internal dissatisfaction of the ,jewish mind with their own doctrines1 and the deeply-rooted conviction of their heart1 that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin4 ,if they really believed that repentance1 or the ,day of ,atonement itself1 or almsgiving1 or merits1 either their own or their forefathers'1 atoned for sin1 they would never have devised such a custom as this4 ,but the spirit of the ,mosaic law has taken too deep a hold on the nation to suffer them to rest satisfied with anything short of actual sacrifice2 and as they have no high-priest and no altar now1 they make a sad and desperate attempt to tranquillize the mind with this invention4 ,the custom then1 proves1 that the rabbinical doctrine respecting the atoning power of repentance is not believed nor heartily received1 even by the ,rabbinists themselves1 how1 then1 can a ,jew hazard his salvation on a doctrine which is contrary to the law of ,moses1 and which its professors do not consider satisfactory8 ,will he rest upon the self-devised sacrifice of a cock8 ,god nowhere promises pardon to this observance2 and how can any man of sense be satisfied without a sure promise of the unchanging and unchangeable ,creator8 ,this trust is as unsatisfactory as any of those that we have already considered4 ,every one of the rabbinic hopes has proved unsafe on examination4 ,personal merit1 the merit of ancestors1 the blowing of the ram's horn1 repentance1 the present observance of the ,day of ,atonement1 the sacrifice of a cock1 all are either directly opposed to1 or unwarranted by1 the ,word of ,god4 ,how1 then1 is a ,jew to obtain pardon for his sins8 ,the custom which we have just considered1 speaks the sense of the ,jewish nation upon this subject1 and plainly declares1 that an atoning sacrifice is the only real hope4 ,it expresses1 in the first place1 the heartfelt conviction1 that every human being is guilty and needs an atonement4 ,it prescribes a victim for man1 woman1 and child1 yea1 even for the unborn babe1 thereby teaching that the nature of man is corrupt1 and that the hereditary guilt1 even where there is no actual transgression1 must be washed away by the blood of atonement4 ,it expresses1 further1 the ,jewish opinion as to the nature of sacrifice1 that the sins are laid upon the victim1 and that the victim is substituted for the guilty4 ,nothing can be plainer than the prescribed formulary1 8,this is my substitute4 ,this is my commutation4 ,this is my atonement40 ,it declares1 further1 that he who offers an atonement for another1 must himself be free from guilt1 for it requires the father of the family first to atone for himself1 and then for those of his house4 ,these are the recorded sentiments of the ,jewish nation1 expressed not only in words1 but embodied in a solemn religious observance on the eve of their most sacred season4 ,by this act the ,jews declare that an atonement by blood is absolutely necessary4 ,the law of ,moses makes the same declaration1 by the appointment of all the rites for the ,day of ,atonement4 ,is it1 then1 likely that the ,god of ,israel would leave his people without that which their hearts desire1 and his law declares to be necessary for salvation8 ,judaism says1 ,yes4 ,it affirms1 by an act repeated every year1 that sacrifice is necessary1 and yet confesses1 in its solemn prayers1 that they have none4 ,it asserts1 therefore1 that ,god has left them without that which is indispensable to procure forgiveness4 ,christianity presents a more merciful view of the ,divine character4 ,it does1 indeed1 acknowledge the necessity of atonement1 but it presents a victim and a high-priest1 whose one offering is sufficient for the sins of the whole world4 ,it says1 that ,god has left neither his own people nor the ,gentiles without the means of forgiveness1 but sent his righteous servant1 the ,messiah1 to bear our sins in his own body upon the tree4 ,the ,priest after the order of ,melchisedek needed no atonement to take away his own sins first1 for he had none4 ,born in a miraculous manner1 by the power of ,god1 his humanity inherited nothing of the guilt of ,adam1 and as the ,lord our ,righteousness1 he could contract no taint of sin4 ,he is1 therefore1 every way qualified to make an atonement for us all4 ,our ,christian hope1 therefore1 is not in a cock1 the sacrifice of which ,god never commanded1 but in that great atonement which ,he appointed4 ,our faith1 our hope1 our trust1 are all built upon ,god's promise1 and cannot be better expressed than in his most holy words3-- 8,but he was wounded for our transgressions1 he was bruised for our iniquities3 the chastisement of our peace was upon him1 and with his stripes we are healed40 ,it cannot1 therefore1 be said1 that we ,christians rest our hope upon an invention of our own4 ,our hope rests1 not upon the dictates of our priests or rabbies1 but upon the words which ,god himself spake by the mouth of his prophet4 ,we can1 therefore1 confidently appeal to the ,jews themselves to decide1 which of the two hopes is the most reasonable4 ,both agreeing that an atonement1 by the shedding of blood1 is necessary for the remission of sins1 ,rabbinism tells its disciples to trust to a species of sacrifice nowhere mentioned in the ,word of ,god4 ,christianity tells us to trust in the sacrifice of that great ,redeemer1 for whose salvation ,jacob waited1 whose atonement the ,mosaic rites prefigured1 and the ,jewish prophets predicted4 ,their hope rests upon the unwarranted words of men2 ours is built upon the ,word of the living ,god1 and is involuntarily confirmed by the rabbies themselves in the very custom which we have just considered4 ,even the nature of the victim is pointed out in the selection of the animal4 7gever7 signifies both 8a man0 and 8a cock10 and thereby signifies1 that a righteous man must be the sinful man's substitute3 and so some of the rabbies say1 that this animal1 8a cock10 was selected1-- 8,because1 as its name signifies #8a man1' there is a substitution of a man for man40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #fje47 ,the principles exactly agree1 but ,christianity is directed in their application by the ,word of ,god1 to ,him who is1 indeed1 very man1 but also ,,the ,,lord ,,our ,,righteousness1 4 4 ,no4 ,,xxxvii4 ,,feast ,,of ,,tabernacles4 ,the progress of the year brings with it again that season1 in which ,god commanded his people to observe ,,the ,,feast ,,of ,,tabernacles2 and the constancy with which ,israelites in every part of the world still observe the rites and customs handed down by their forefathers1 necessarily commands respect and admiration4 ,when we remember the many centuries during which their dispersion has continued1 the universal oppression which they have been compelled to suffer1 and the unmerited contempt with which they have had to contend1 we cannot but honour the strength of moral courage which they have displayed1 in thus observing and handing down to their children a religion1 which has been the cause of their misfortunes4 ,but this very constancy1 and the respect which it begets1 naturally leads us to inquire whether the religious system itself be true1 and1 therefore1 worthy of that fidelity with which it has been preserved2 and1 above all1 whether this constancy is such as at the last great day to meet the approbation of ,him who judgeth not as man judgeth4 ,the professors of this system think1 of course1 that it is1 and that by observing these rites and ceremonies1 they are keeping the commands of ,god1 and thereby ensuring his favour2 and with regard to the observance of the ,feast of ,tabernacles in particular1 they are taught to believe that they alone are so important1 as at the day of judgment1 to prove ,israel's obedience1 and the disobedience of the other nations4 ,we will first state the doctrines of modern ,judaism on this subject1 and then examine whether they be well founded4 ,in the ,synagogue ,prayers for this feast we find it stated1 that the construction of a tabernacle according to rabbinic prescription1 is a work of merit3-- 1 1 8,it must be four cubits long1 and four cubits broad3 but if it be less1 it is profane2 that it may render the people of ,israel meritorious4 7,p4 #aaf47 ,and a little lower down1 after describing the feast in ,paradise on the salted ,leviathan and ,behemoth1 it adds1 that this one precept will form the last trial vouchsafed to the ,gentiles1 and that their unwillingness to keep it will prove the cause of their final condemnation3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,all nations will come to be judged in the presence of ,him who sitteth upon the throne of judgment2 in righteousness will he judge us4 ,the nations will then say1 ,give us the order of thy precepts1 and we will perform them1 that we may be equal with those in happiness1 ,o ,thou1 who art great in power1 dwelling on high4 ,the ,most ,high1 who judgeth all in truth1 will cause them to hear1 and understand his words1 saying1 ,i have one small precept2 its name1 tabernacle1 and its ordinations3 four sides1 and a shade over it3 fail ye not to observe it4 ,they then will make the shadowy booths to abide under1 but the sun will shine so hot as nearly to burn them1 when they will spurn at it with their feet4 ,the ,holy ,one will then pour out his wrath upon them1 and cast them into gehinnom hell without mercy1 into the lowest part with confusion40 7,ibid47 ,this extraordinary account of the day of judgment1 and the condemnation of the ,gentiles1 has been adopted from the ,talmud1 where it is given at great length1 and all the particulars fully detailed4 ,to give the whole would occupy too much of our space2 but as parts of it are necessary to the full consideration of this subject1 we give the following extracts3-- 1 8,in the time to come1 the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 will bring a roll of the law in his bosom1 and say1 ,let every one1 who has occupied himself herein1 come and receive his reward4 ,immediately the nations of the world will gather themselves together1 and come in promiscuous crowds1 as it is said1 #8,let all the nations be gathered together4' 7,isaiah xliii4 #i47 ,the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 will then say1 ,come not before me promiscuously1 but let each nation come by itself along with its learned men40 ,then follows an account of the appearance of each nation1 and of the vain attempts which they make to justify their conduct4 ,after which the narrative thus proceeds3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,the ,gentiles will then say before him1 ,o ,lord of the world1 the ,israelites received the law1 but how did they keep it8 ,the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 will reply1 ,i bear them witness that they have kept the law4 ,the ,gentiles will say1 ,o ,lord of the world1 is it fair that a ,father should be a witness for his children8 ,for it is written1 #8,israel is my son1 even my first-born4' 7,exod4 iv4 #bb47 ,the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 will then say to them1 ,let the heaven and the earth bear witness to them1 that they have kept the whole law4 ,the ,gentiles will answer1 ,o ,lord of the world1 the heavens and the earth are interested witnesses1 for it is said1 #8,if my covenant be not with day and night1 and if ,i have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and the earth4' 7,jer4 xxxiii4 #be47 ,r4 ,simon ,ben ,lakish says1 ,what is the meaning of the words #8,and it was evening and it was morning1 the sixth day8' ,they show us that the ,holy and ,blessed ,one1 made a condition with the creation1 and said1 ,if ,israel will receive my law1 all is well2 but if not1 then ,i will turn you back into chaos4 ,hezekiah also teaches this same truth1 saying1 ,what is the meaning of the words1 #8,thou didst cause judgment to be heard from heaven2 the earth feared1 and was still8' 7,ps4 lxxvi4 #i1 ,eng4 #h47 ,if it feared1 how could it be still2 and if it was still1 how could it fear8 ,the answer is1 at first it feared that ,israel would not receive the law1 and it should be turned into chaos2 but afterwards it was still4 ,god will then say to the ,gentiles1 ,then let some of yourselves come1 and bear witness to ,israel that they have kept the whole law4 ,nimrod shall then come forth and testify of ,abraham that he did not commit idolatry4 ,laban shall come forth and testify of ,jacob that he was not suspected of dishonesty4 ,potiphar's wife shall come forth and testify of ,joseph that he was not suspected of the transgression4 ,nebuchadnezzar shall come forth and testify of ,hannaniah1 ,mishael1 and ,azariah1 that they would not worship the image4 ,darius shall come and testify of ,daniel that he did not neglect prayer4 ,bildad the ,shuhite1 and ,zophar the ,naamathite1 and ,eliphaz the ,temanite1 and ,elihu the son of ,beracheel1 shall come forth and testify of ,israel that they have kept the whole law1 as it is said1 #8,let them being forth their witnesses1 that they may be justified4' 7,isaiah xliii4 #i47 ,the ,gentiles will then say1 ,o ,lord of the world1 give us the law from the beginning1 and we will do it4 ,to this the ,holy ,one will reply1 ,o fools1 he that works on the eve of the ,sabbath shall eat on the ,sabbath4 ,he that will not work on the ,sabbath eve1 from whence should he eat on the ,sabbath8 ,nevertheless1 ,i have one easy commandment1 ,tabernacle is its name1 go1 therefore1 and do it4 ,but how is it possible1 to affirm that ,god will do this1 when ,r4 ,joshua1 the son of ,levi1 says1 ,what is the meaning of the words1 #8,which ,i command thee this day8' ,and says1 the meaning is1 they are to be observed to-day i4e41 in this world1 and not tomorrow i4e41 in the world to come4#cc ,to-day they are to be observed2 but the reward is not to be received to-day4 ,the answer is1 that ,god does not deal with his creatures in a tyrannical manner4 ,but why is this called an easy commandment8 ,because it is not attended with any pecuniary loss4 ,immediately every one of the ,gentiles will hasten away1 and make a tabernacle on the roof of his house4 ,but the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 will cause the sun to pierce them with an extraordinary heat at that season1 and then every one of them will kick down his tabernacle and go forth10 c4 7,avodah ,zarah1 fol4 #b1 #c47 ,such is the doctrine of the ,talmud1 adopted1 and therefore sealed with the most solemn sanction1 by the public worship of the synagogue4 ,in the first place it is perfectly false2 it has not even the merit of plausibility4 ,it is only astonishing how an imagination so absurd should ever have found its way into the prayers of ,israel2 and stranger still that the ,jews of ,england should suffer such a foul blot still to remain on their public services4 ,it certainly represents ,judaism in the most unfavourable point of view1 as a religion of the grossest and most inconsistent superstition2 and proves1 beyond all controversy1 first1 that the synagogue receives1 as of divine authority1 even the fables of the ,talmud2 and1 secondly1 that the authors of the oral law1 who could either invent or believe so absurd a statement1 cannot be depended upon as faithful transmitters of the religion of the prophets4 ,further1 it totally misrepresents the character of ,god4 ,it describes ,him1 first1 as bearing witness to the obedience of ,israel1 whilst in ,his ,word he bears constant testimony to their disobedience4 ,here he is represented also as calling upon heaven and earth to attest their innocence and righteousness1 whilst in ,his ,word he calls upon them to be the witnesses of their rebellion4 8,hear1 ,o heavens2 and give ear1 ,o earth2 for the ,lord hath spoken3 ,i have nourished and brought up children1 and they have rebelled against me40 7,isaiah i4 #b47 ,and again1 8,be astonished1 ,o ye heavens1 at this1 and be horribly afraid1 be ye very desolate1 saith the ,lord4 ,for my people have committed two evils2 they have forsaken me1 the fountain of living waters1 and hewed them out cisterns1 broken cisterns1 that can hold no water40 7,jer4 ii4 #ab47 ,these passages of the word of ,god are directly opposed to the above statement of the oral law4 ,but farther1 it misrepresents the ,divine ,being as an unmerciful and unjust judge1 who pretends to give the guilty ,gentiles another and easy trial by giving them the commandment respecting the tabernacles1 and then employs his omnipotence so to plague them with the heat of the sun1 as to render it impossible for them to yield obedience4 ,such a representation is altogether unworthy of the ,judge of all the earth1 who will deal justly by the ,gentiles as well as the ,jews4 ,but besides misrepresenting the divine character1 it misleads the unlearned and superstitious to believe that1 at the day of judgment1 ,god will not render to every man according to his deeds1 but will pass by their sins and their impenitence1 if only they be ,israelites4 ,it therefore begets a false confidence1 and is eminently calculated to lull men asleep in their sins4 ,the man who believes this fable of the ,gentiles bearing witness to the righteousness of ,abraham1 ,joseph1 ,daniel1 c41 and thinks that this is sufficient for his acquittal at the bar of judgment1 can have no motive for personal repentance or righteousness4 ,neither does this fable tend to produce good will and respect towards his ,gentile fellow-sinners4 ,few men will elevate themselves above their notions of the ,deity4 ,when1 then1 the ,rabbinists see that1 according to the oral law1 ,god treats the ,gentiles with injustice and cruelty1 is it natural to suppose that he will treat them differently8 ,this and similar passages well merit the serious consideration of all influential ,israelites4 ,it is imperative upon all such to determine1 whether such passages of their prayers and their law are of divine authority or not2 and if they are convinced of their falsehood1 to use their unceasing exertions to expunge them from their religious system4 ,as long as they exist1 and are publicly read in the synagogue1 men can only come to one conclusion1 and that is1 that the characteristics of the ,rabbinical religion are superstition and uncharitableness4 ,nothing but a public protest against the error1 and an erasure from the prayer-book1 will satisfy the mind1 or wipe away the reproach from ,israel4 ,the private professions of individuals can be of no avail in this matter4 ,men will go to the authorized books1 especially to the prayer-book of every class of religionist1 in order to judge of his principles2 and no one will believe that any man can be so careless or so presumptuous as to address the ,divine ,being in the language of acknowledged falsehood4 ,but above all1 let every ,jew compare this account of the day of judgment with that contained in our ,christian books4 ,judaism teaches that at that great day ,god will appear as a partial and cruel judge4 ,christianity gives us the following account of the same period3--8,when the ,son of man shall come in his glory and all the holy angels with him1 then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory2 and before him shall be gathered all nations and he shall separate them one from another1 as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats3 and he shall set the sheep on his right hand1 but the goats on the left4 ,then shall the ,king say unto them on his right hand1 ,come1 ye blessed of my father1 inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world3 for ,i was an hungred1 and ye gave me meat3 ,i was thirsty1 and ye gave me drink3 ,i was a stranger1 and ye took me in3 naked1 and ye clothed me3 ,i was sick1 and ye visited me3 ,i was in prison1 and ye came unto me4 ,then shall the righteous answer and say1 ,lord1 when saw we thee an hungred1 and fed thee8 or thirsty1 and gave thee drink8 when saw we thee a stranger1 and took thee in8 or naked1 and clothed thee8 or when saw we thee sick1 and in prison1 and came unto thee8 ,and the ,king shall answer and say unto them1 ,verily ,i say unto you1 ,inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren1 ye have done it unto me4 ,then shall he say also unto them on the left hand1 ,depart from me1 ye cursed1 into everlasting fire1 prepared for the devil and his angels3 for ,i was an hungred1 and ye gave me no meat3 ,i was thirsty1 and ye gave me no drink3 ,i was a stranger1 and ye took me not in3 naked1 and ye clothed me not3 sick1 and in prison1 and ye visited me not4 ,then shall they also answer him1 saying1 ,lord1 when saw we thee an hungred1 or athirst1 or a stranger1 or naked1 or sick1 or in prison1 and did not minister unto thee8 ,then shall he answer them1 saving1 ,verily ,i say unto you1 ,inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these1 ye did it not to me4 ,and these shall go away into everlasting punishment3 but the righteous into life eternal40 7,matt4 xxv4 #ca-df47 ,such is the view which ,christianity sets before us of the day of judgment1 and the principles according to which that judgment shall be conducted4 ,you will observe that the whole account is essentially different from that given by the ,talmud4 ,in the first place it represents ,god as a just ,judge1 altogether overlooking nationality2 taking no notice of the temporary distinctions of ,jew and ,gentile3 but fixing his eyes on the eternal features of moral character1 and according to these fixing the eternal destinies of each individual4 ,in the second place it tends to promote good will and charity between man and man1 for it represents charity or the want of charity as the main points of inquiry1 and the distinctions according to which the eternal portion of each is assigned4 ,we ask1 then1 every impartial and candid ,jew to tell us1 which of these two accounts are most worthy of the great ,god whom we worship8 ,we ,christians believe that the synagogue-worshippers are in error1 and they again think us in error2 but we have now before us the doctrines of the two systems on the most important point in all theology--the principle of final judgment2 by their respective statements1 then1 on this subject let each system be judged4 ,judaism says1 that one class of men is to be saved by the partiality of the ,judge1 and the other class condemned simply because they are ,gentiles4 ,christianity says1 that all men shall be tried impartially by one rule1 and that neither prepossession nor prejudice1 but justice alone1 shall influence the decision4 ,which1 then1 ,judaism or ,christianity1 is most agreeable to the character of ,him of whom the ,psalmist says1 8,he cometh to judge the earth3 with righteousness shall he judge the world1 and the nations with equity80 ,we are sure that the good sense of the ,jewish nation must decide1 that the impartial justice of the ,new ,testament-representation is most in accordance with the spirit of the law and the prophets4 ,nay1 we believe that every devout and thinking ,israelite will feel that the ,talmudic picture of ,god's judgment misrepresents the ,god of ,israel as much as any graven image ever deified by heathen idolaters4 ,to suppose that ,god would make a mock overture of mercy1 or offer a mock trial to any of his creatures1 is to strip him of the attributes of ,deity1 and to exhibit a blind and senseless bigot as the object of ,israel's worship4 ,a statement so abhorrent even from human reason1 and so inconsistent with the ,word of ,god1 proves that its authors were not moved by the ,spirit1 and that the religion of which it forms a part cannot be divine4 ,but here1 as in many cases which we have already pointed out1 the ,new ,testament avoids the error of the ,talmud1 and teaches the doctrine conformable to the law1 and in accordance with right reason4 ,let the advocates of the oral law explain the fact4 ,but this ,talmudic representation of the day of judgment is not only opposed to reason and ,scripture1 but also seems to contradict other statements of the oral law4 ,here the ,gentiles appear to be marked out for destruction2 whereas1 we are told elsewhere1 that the pious of the nations of the world are to have a part in the world to come3 and that obedience to the seven commandments of the sons of ,noah1 is all that is required from a ,gentile4 ,if this be true1 what need is there of giving them the command to keep the ,feast of ,tabernacles8 ,but1 above all1 if they are to be cast down into the lowest hell1 as the ,prayer-book says1 how can they have a part of the blessings of the world to come8 ,it is at the very least1 the duty of those who advocate the oral law1 to explain this matter to us ,gentiles4 ,we cannot persuade ourselves that a religion1 which makes so little provision for the eternal welfare of the great bulk of the human race1 can possibly proceed from ,him who is the ,god of the spirits of all flesh1 the ,creator and ,preserver of all mankind4 ,living daily by his bounty1 and receiving all we have at his most gracious hands we believe that if he makes such provision for our bodies1 ,he has made still more for our immortal spirits2 and therefore1 amongst other reasons1 we believe in ,christianity2 for if it be not true1 there is no spiritual provision for the ,gentiles1 and ,god has left the majority of his rational creatures without any proof of his paternal affection4 ,footnote #cc3 1 ,no4 ,,xxxviii4 ,,prayers ,,for ,,the ,,dead4 ,to the fool1 who hath said in his heart1 ,there is no ,god1 it is a matter of little consequence1 whether the religion of his forefathers afford a reasonable ground of hope or not4 ,he may therefore consistently neglect all inquiry into the nature and evidences of that religion in which he happened to be born4 ,he does not believe in it1 whatever it may be1 and such an inquiry could have no interest for him4 ,not so with the ,jew or the ,christian1 who honestly believes1 as he has been taught1 that there is1 in another world1 an abode of bliss1 and another of woe4 ,his earnest desire must be to know how he may attain to the one and escape the other2 and if his religion does not afford him a hope1 a reasonable1 well-grounded hope of salvation1 it is not worth the having4 ,we say a reasonable hope1 for as it has pleased ,god to endow us with reason and understanding1 and to give us his ,word to guide our reason1 no other hope can or ought to satisfy us4 ,in examining1 then1 the modern ,jewish religion1 one great test of its value is1 whether it affords a hope on which a reasonable man can rely1 and upon which he can hazard his eternal welfare4 ,we think not1 and we have already given some reasons for this opinion4 ,the inconsistency and contradictory nature of the rabbinic doctrines respecting justification and atonement appear to us so glaring as to destroy all confidence in the hope which they propose3 and the custom1 which prevails at this and other festivals1 of praying for the dead1 proves1 beyond a doubt1 that the rabbinic hope is a mere delusion4 ,amongst the prayers of the ,feast of ,tabernacles1 we find the following declaration and prayer3-- 1 8,it is customary among the dispersions of ,israel1 to make mention of the souls of their departed parents1 c41 on the day of atonement1 and the ultimate days of the three festivals2 and to offer prayers for the repose of their souls4 8,may ,god remember the soul of my honoured father1 ,a4 ,b4 who is gone to his repose2 for that ,i now solemnly vow charity for his sake2 in reward of this1 may his soul be bound up in the bundle of life1 with the souls of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob2 ,sarah1 ,rebekah1 ,rachel1 and ,leah1 with the rest of the righteous males and females that are in ,paradise2 and let us say1 ,amen40 8,may ,god remember the soul of my honoured mother10 c4 7,prayer for the ,feast of ,tabernacles1 p4 #aef47 ,now this custom and this prayer show that the ,jews themselves do not believe in their own doctrines1 nor put any trust in the hopes held out by the oral law2 for if they did1 they would never observe this custom nor offer this prayer4 ,if they believed that their departed parents were already safe--that their merits1 or the merits of their ancestors1 or the ,day of ,atonement1 c41 had procured for them pardon and eternal life1 why should they offer alms1 and pray that ,god would accept the alms as a ransom for the deceased8 ,the fact of making such a vow and offering such a prayer proves1 that the ,rabbinical ,jew has no ground for believing in the salvation of even his own father and mother2 that on the contrary his belief is1 that they have not been bound up in the bundle of life1 and that they are not in paradise with ,abraham and the other saints2 but that they are in some other place1 whence he hopes1 by his prayer and his almsgiving1 to ransom them4 ,here1 then1 we see that the rabbinical hope is a mere delusion4 ,after all his fasting and ceremonial observances1 he has no hope after death of going to the mansions of the blessed4 ,his sad prospect is1 that when he goes hence1 he must go to the place of punishment1 and there abide until the prayers and almsgiving of his children purchase his liberation4 ,according1 then1 to this doctrine1 every ,jew and ,jewess dies without pardon1 for if they were pardoned1 they would not go to the place of punishment1 and if they did not go to the place of punishment1 there would be no necessity to offer alms in order to deliver their souls4 ,so then1 after all the pretensions and promises of the rabbies1 they here fairly confess that all the hopes which they have held out are a mere lie and a delusion2 that none of their observances can deliver the soul1 and that even after the dread hour of death1 the survivors have still to undertake the work of saving the deceased4 ,this inference follows inevitably from the custom and the prayer which we have just considered2 but it does not rest solely on these4 ,the oral law furnishes other adequate proof1 that the ,jewish survivors of a departed parent do not believe that he is safe1 and that therefore a dying ,jew can have no hope of his own salvation2 for it requires the surviving son to repeat a certain prayer for his departed parent1 and that for many months1 in order to procure his release1 as we read in the ,joreh ,deah3-- 1 1 8,therefore the custom is for twelve months to repeat the prayer called ,kaddish1 and also to read the lesson in the prophets1 and to pray the evening-prayer at the going out of the ,sabbath1 for that is the hour when the souls return to hell2 but when the son prays and sanctifies in public1 he redeems his father and his mother from hell40 7#cgf47 ,now every child who observes this custom1 makes a public confession1 that his deceased parent is not enjoying the bliss of paradise1 but suffering the torments of hell4 ,this is but a poor hope for a child respecting his parent1 the very utmost limit of which is1 that he is not one of the notoriously wicked1 and that he may perhaps1 by his prayers1 get him out of the place of torment4 ,but if he believes in the oral law1 he must be convinced that his father or mother1 with all their exertions1 and notwithstanding the merits of their forefathers1 and the benefits of the ,day of ,atonement1 died in sin1 sunk into perdition1 and that he must now undertake the work of their salvation4 ,the dying ,jew1 therefore1 has no hope when he dies of being admitted to a state of happiness2 he cannot die with the peace of one who knows that his sins are forgiven1 but must look forward with horror to at least eleven dreary months of punishment in the abodes of the damned4 ,the doctrine of the ,talmud is1 that those who die in communion with the synagogue1 or who have never been ,jews1 are punished for twelve months1 but that ,jewish heretics and apostates are doomed to eternal punishment4 8,israelites who sin with their body1 and also ,gentiles1 descend into hell1 and are judged there for twelve months4 ,after the twelve months their body is consumed and their soul is burnt1 and the wind scatters them under the soles of the feet of the righteous1 as it is said1 #8,ye shall tread down the wicked1 for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet4' 7,mal4 iv4 #c47 ,but heretics1 and informers1 and ,epicureans1 who have denied the law or the resurrection of the dead1 or who have separated from the customs of the congregation1 or who have caused their fear in the land of the living1 who have sinned1 or caused many to sin1 as ,jeroboam1 the son of ,nebat1 all such go down to hell and are judged for ever40 7,rosh ,hashanah1 fol4 #ag4 #a47 ,according to this1 the dying ,israelite ought to expect twelve months of torment1 and his surviving son ought to repeat the prescribed prayer for twelve months2 but the rabbies have commanded that the prayer should be repeated only for eleven months1 to intimate that the deceased was not so wicked as to be obliged to remain all the time of torment3-- 8,the custom is1 not to say ,kaddish more than eleven months1 so as not to cast a reproach on the character of the deceased father and mother as if they were wicked1 for twelve months are the term appointed for the wicked40 7,joreh ,deah1 #cgf47 ,from this it is clear that a dying ,jew's expectation must be to endure the torments of hell for at least eleven months2 and when he is dead1 his son confesses1 in the most public manner1 and the appointed prayers of the synagogue confess1 of every departed ,jew1 that he died in sin1 and was not worthy to enter into the bliss of paradise2 and express1 moreover1 their conviction that his portion is actually with the damned4 ,thus it is evident that ,judaism holds out no hope of the forgiveness of sins1 and that all its prescribed observances are of no avail in the hour of need4 ,a ,jew's sad contemplation on his death is1 then1 that he is going down to hell1 and his hope of liberation is based upon the prayers of his son1 or upon the fact of his being an ,israelite4 ,but is this a reasonable ground of hope8 ,no hope of salvation can be reasonable which is not built upon a plain promise of ,god4 ,our reason can tell us nothing about either heaven or hell2 and therefore no speculations of our own can satisfy us respecting either one or the other4 ,the only satisfactory testimony can come from ,god's revealed will2 but in the whole volume of the ,old ,testament1 there is not one promise declaring that an ,israelite shall be delivered from hell after twelve months' punishment1 or that the son's public prayers in the synagogue shall deliver the father4 ,this is all the mere invention of the rabbies1 without the least warrant from the ,word of ,god4 ,it is1 therefore1 not a hope on which any reasonable man can rest in peace4 ,the sum of the whole matter is1 that every ,jew expects to go to hell1 and that he has no promise of ,god to assure him that he shall be redeemed thence4 ,judaism is not1 therefore1 a religion which affords a rational hope of salvation4 ,in asserting that every ,israelite must go down to hell1 it teaches that sin is not forgiven by ,god1 but must be atoned for by the personal suffering of the offender2 and that happiness cannot be enjoyed until personal satisfaction has been yielded by twelve months' torments4 ,now if this principle were true1 there could be no salvation at all4 ,sin1 as being an offence against an infinite ,being1 is infinite in magnitude1 and therefore1 requires infinite punishment4 ,the justice of ,god is also infinite1 and requires an infinite satisfaction2 so that if this satisfaction is to be rendered by the personal suffering of the offender1 that suffering must be infinite1 that is1 it must endure for ever and ever1 and thus salvation is altogether out of the question4 ,the ,jewish hope is1 therefore1 unwarranted by ,scripture1 and contrary to reason1 and1 we may add1 inconsistent with itself4 ,in the custom and doctrine which we have just considered1 a dying ,jew is taught to hope that he shall be delivered from that place of torment1 whither he is going1 either on account of his son's prayers1 or on account of his ,jewish origin4 ,but on his death-bed he is taught to believe that his death will be an atonement for his sins1 for in his dying confession1 these words are put into his mouth3-- 1 8,but if the time of my visitation to death be near1 ,o let my death be an expiation for all my sins1 iniquities1 and transgressions1 wherein ,i have sinned1 offended1 and transgressed against thee1 from the day of my existence40 ,these two doctrines are plainly contrary the one to the other4 ,if death be an atonement for all sins1 then1 when it is once suffered1 all these sins are forgiven1 and there is no need of further punishment in hell for twelve months4 ,but if this further punishment be inflicted1 then the death of the individual is not an atonement for his sins4 ,the ,jew may choose which of these hopes he pleases2 but whichever he may assert to be true1 the other is necessarily false2 and if one be false1 then the oral law teaches falsehood1 and cannot be depended upon with respect to the other4 ,there is1 then1 in these two statements1 a glaring inconsistency1 which makes them both suspicious in themselves3 and the ,word of ,god is as opposed to this last statement1 as to the former4 ,the ,bible represents death as a consequence and punishment of ,adam's sin1 not as an atonement3 and hence it is that infants die1 who have never committed actual sin1 and do not need an atonement on that account4 ,death is1 therefore1 a punishment1 and that which is a punishment can never be an atonement4 ,the dying ,jew1 then1 if he be a reasonable man1 has no hope that can yield him peace and consolation in that solemn hour4 ,he prays that his death may atone for his sins1 and yet believes the very contrary--that he is going down to the place of the damned1 and that his son will have to undertake the work of his redemption4 ,how any thoughtful man1 especially how any ,israelite who has read the ,law and the ,prophets1 can be content with such a religion1 we cannot comprehend4 ,the very essence of religion1 the very consideration that gives it any value1 is the comfort which it affords to the departing sinner4 ,if it cannot soothe1 support1 and comfort him in the hour of death1 it is not worth the having4 ,the ,christian faith is very different1 and1 in our opinion1 far more in accordance with the ,old ,testament4 ,we believe1 in the first place1 that there is a full and perfect pardon for all sins by the atonement of the ,messiah1 so that the sinner who dies in repentance and faith1 is delivered from all punishment and other consequences of sin1 and enters at once into the abodes of the blessed1 there to await the morning of the resurrection4 ,the ,old ,testament promised that ,messiah should bear our sins4 ,the ,new ,testament tells us that ,he has borne them1 and that therefore we can 8now be justified from all things from which we could not be justified by the law of ,moses40 7,acts xiii4 #ch1 #ci47 ,it tells us that 8,god made ,him to be sin for us1 who knew no sin2 that we might be made the righteousness of ,god in him0 7#b ,cor4 v4 #ba72 and 8that if any man sin1 we have an advocate with the ,father1 ,jesus1 the ,messiah1 the ,righteous2 and he is the propitiation for our sins3 and not for ours only1 but also for the sins of the whole world40 7#a ,john ii4 #a1 #b47 ,we believe1 therefore1 that ,messiah has borne all that we ought to have borne1 as the prophet says-- 8,the chastisement of our peace was upon him1 and with his stripes we are healed10 7,isaiah liii4 #e17 and that now we are delivered4 ,there is no twelvemonth of torment awaiting those whom ,messiah has redeemed1 neither do we trust in our own death as a possible atonement4 ,our hope is firmly fixed1 and1 therefore1 though sinners1 we can die in peace1 resting on the salvation which ,god himself has wrought1 in no fear of the torments of the damned1 but humbly expecting1 for the ,messiah's sake1 to be admitted into the mansions of the blessed4 ,resting on this hope1 the ,christian can say1 8,to me to live is ,christ1 and to die is gain40 7,philip1 i4 #ba47 ,he can look forward from death to the glorious consummation1 as ,st4 ,paul did1 who1 when the hour of his martyrdom approached1 was enabled to say1 8,i am now ready to be offered1 and the time of my departure is at hand4 ,i have fought a good fight2 ,i have finished my course2 ,i have kept the faith3 henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness1 which the ,lord1 the righteous ,judge1 shall give me at that day2 and not to me only1 but unto all them also that love his appearing40 ,the ,christian expects after death not to spend twelve dreary months in hell1 8,for we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved1 we have a building of ,god1 an house not made with hands1 eternal in the heavens4 ,for in this we groan1 earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven3 if so be1 that being clothed1 we shall not be found naked4 ,for we that are in this tabernacle do groan1 being burdened3 not for that we would be unclothed1 but clothed upon1 that mortality might be swallowed up of life40 7#b ,cor4 v4 #a-d47 ,such is the hope which ,christianity holds out1 and it is hardly necessary to prove that it is more satisfactory1 and more calculated to convey peace to the conscience of a dying believer1 than the dread prospect1 of twelve months' sojourn in the place of torment4 ,this in itself proves1 that ,christianity is greatly superior to ,judaism1 and even affords a presumption that ,christianity is true4 ,reason tells us1 that if ,god has given a revelation at all1 that revelation must contain the way of obtaining pardon for sins1 and be able to administer consolation to the dying4 ,in this respect ,judaism fails4 ,it promises forgiveness and justification to a thousand ceremonial observances1 but in the hour of man's extremity1 it tells him that there is no way of pardon1 but that he must go down into torment1 and expiate his sins by actual suffering4 ,this system cannot1 therefore1 be of ,god4 ,christianity1 on the contrary1 has the first great essential in religion2 it informs man how he can obtain forgiveness1 and tells him how to die in peace2 and the system of pardon and consolation which it proposes1 is in exact accordance with the doctrine of ,moses and the prophets4 ,moses promises pardon to an atoning sacrifice4 ,isaiah says1 that ,messiah is to be the true atonement2 and ,christianity rests upon these two principles4 ,the ,jew himself must admit1 that our hope has at least a strong appearance of truth1 and that we have the letter of the ,old ,testament in our favour4 ,we have1 therefore1 more reason to trust to ,christianity1 than he has for resting on ,judaism1 which has not even a semblance of proof1 and is as far from the letter as from the spirit of the ,old ,testament4 ,we would earnestly request of every ,jew to consider what is his hope in death1 and what is his prospect after it8 ,can he be content with that which ,judaism offers8 ,can he be happy in the prospect of twelve months' torment8 ,or1 can the repetition of ,kaddish afford him any hope of liberation from that place1 whither his sins have brought him8 ,he cannot pretend to have any warrant from ,scripture4 ,where does ,moses tell a ,jewish child to say ,kaddish for his deceased parent1 or that the saying of it will deliver the soul from the grasp of ,divine justice8 ,and reason does not offer a greater measure of consolation4 ,reason says plainly1 either that the deceased is guilty or not guilty2 either1 therefore1 justice demands that he should be punished or delivered4 ,in the one case the prayer is unavailing1 in the other unnecessary4 ,reason says that ,god either pardons or punishes2 but that there is no middle way4 ,judaism then offers a hope equally unwarranted by reason and ,scripture1 and thus1 forsaking a poor sinner in the hour of his extremity1 is not worthy of the profession of any one who uses his reason1 or reveres the ,word of ,god4 ,no4 ,,xxxix4 ,,almsgiving4 ,the object of our late numbers has been to point out the inconsistency and precariousness of the various hopes1 which the oral law holds out to its advocates1 and the consequent inadequacy of a religion which leaves its professors without a reasonable hope of eternal happiness4 ,in the course of our observations1 the subject of almsgiving twice presented itself prominently to our notice2 first1 as a means of compensating for the sins and omissions of the past year2 and secondly1 as a means of promoting the repose of departed souls2 from which it appears that the oral law considers this duty as most important and beneficial both to the living and the dead4 ,the object of the present paper shall therefore be1 to inquire into the rabbinic doctrine of almsgiving1 and to compare it with the law and the prophets4 ,the duty and extent of almsgiving are thus defined3-- 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 8,it is an affirmative precept to give alms to the poor of ,israel1 according as the poor have need1 if in the power of the giver2 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt open thine hand wide to him' 7,deut4 xv4 #h72 and again1 #8,thou shalt relieve him1 a proselyte#cd or a sojourner1 that he may live with thee2' and again1 #8,that thy brother may live with thee4' 7,lev4 xxv4 #ce1 #cf47 ,whosoever sees a poor man begging1 and shuts his eyes against him1 and does not give him alms1 transgresses a negative precept3 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt not harden thine heart nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother4' 7,deut4 xv4 #g47 ,according as the poor hath need1 thou art commanded to give4 ,if he has no clothing1 he is to be clothed2 if he has no furniture1 it is to be bought for him2 if he has no wife1 he is to be helped to marry one2 if a woman1 she is to be assisted in getting a husband3 yea1 if it had been the poor man's custom to ride upon a horse1 and to have a servant running before him--but he is now come down in the world1--it is a duty to buy him a horse to ride1 and a servant to run before him1 for it is said1 #8,sufficient for his need1 in that which he wanteth' 7,deut4 xv4 #h72 and thou art commanded perfectly to relieve his want1 but not to make him rich4 ,if an orphan apply for assistance in order to marry1 it is a duty to hire a house for him1 and to provide all necessary furniture1 and afterwards to help him to marry4 ,if a poor man come and ask for relief1 and the giver has not as much as he wants1 he ought to give what his means afford4 ,how much8 ,he that gives a fifth of his property fulfils the commandment well4 ,he that gives one part in ten fulfils it in a middling manner4 ,he that gives less must be regarded as a person with an evil eye40 7,hilchoth ,matt'noth ,aniim1 cvii4 #a-e47 ,in this definition of the nature and extent of the duty of almsgiving1 there is much that is good and worthy of our admiration1 especially in this selfish and money-loving age1 when poverty is regarded1 if not punished1 as a crime1 and the poor are1 by many1 considered as unworthy of all domestic comfort4 ,without binding ourselves to the approval of all the details here specified1 we must acknowledge1 that the spirit of this passage is agreeable to the idea of true charity1 and1 if universally acted upon1 would do more for the happiness of mankind than some theories now afloat4 ,but though ready to admire and to acknowledge the general beauty and excellence of this passage1 we must also remark that the main feature of charity is1 by the rabbinical system1 excluded4 ,god commands that this help should extend beyond the narrow limits of selfishness and nationality1 to 8the stranger and the sojourner10 but the oral law neutralizes the mercifulness of ,god's commandment by making the word stranger signify a proselyte to ,judaism4 ,the original ,hebrew word 7,ger7 plainly means a stranger1 as may be seen in the words of ,moses-- 8,love ye therefore the stranger2 for ye were strangers in the land of ,egypt40 7,deut4 x4 #ai47 ,it is certain that the ,israelites were not proselytes1 but strangers2 this word1 ,ger1 therefore1 signifies stranger1 not proselyte2 and yet the oral law says that no one can be a ,ger without sacrifice1 circumcision1 and baptism1 or now1 that there is no temple1 without the two last requisites3-- 1 8,at the present time when there is no sacrifice1 circumcision and baptism are necessary1 and when the temple is rebuilt1 he must bring a sacrifice4 ,a ,ger who is circumcised but not baptized1 or baptized but not circumcised1 is not a ,ger1 until he be both baptized and circumcised4 7,hilchoth ,issure ,biah1 c4 xiii4 #e1 #f470 ,this rabbinical definition of what is meant by ,ger1 restricts the exercise of charity within a much narrower limit than that prescribed by ,god1 and does1 in fact1 destroy one of the most beautiful features of the ,mosaic law1 namely1 the merciful provision which it makes for the relief of the stranger4 ,the law of ,moses has the spirit of its divine ,author4 ,he calls himself 8a jealous ,god10 and it may well be called a jealous law1 watching carefully over every departure from truth1 and punishing it rigorously3 and yet1 like ,god himself1 this just jealousy is tempered with mercy1 and beams with love4 ,the oral law1 on the contrary1 is an envious and vindictive code1 and its zeal degenerates into narrow-hearted bigotry4 ,it would not only punish the idolater1 but exclude every stranger from the pale of charity1 unless he be a proselyte2 and an ,israelite too1 if he had in any wise dared to transgress the rabbinical commands4 ,a remarkable instance of this hatred1 to those whom it considers apostates1 occurs in these laws respecting almsgiving4 ,the oral law says1 that the most meritorious exercise of charity is1 the ransoming of captives3-- 1 8,the ransoming of captives goes before the feeding and clothing of the poor1 and there is no commandment so great as this40 7,hilchoth ,matt'noth ,aniim1 c4 #h47 ,and yet if a brother ,israelite should deviate from the rabbinical commands1 the oral law makes it unlawful to ransom him1 at the same time that it enjoins the ransom of a slave if he be a proselyte3 1 8,a slave who is in captivity because he has received the baptism of slaves1 and taken upon himself the commandments1 is to be redeemed4 ,but as to a captive who has altered even one commandment1 if for instance he has eaten forbidden food in order to vex1 it is forbidden to ransom such an one40 7,ibid47 ,thus the oral law forbids all compassion even to an ,israelite1 if he is not of the rabbinic religion4 ,the conduct which it prescribes towards poor ,gentiles1 8for the sake of the ways of peace10 1 we have considered long since2 but the prohibition to receive alms of the ,gentiles1 deserves notice here1 as it furnishes another proof of the contracted views of the rabbies1 and the falsehood of the oral law3-- 1 8,it is unlawful for an ,israelite to receive alms from the ,gentiles openly4 ,but if he cannot live by the alms of ,israel1 and cannot receive it from the ,gentiles privately1 then it is lawful4 ,if a king or prince of the ,gentiles sends money to ,israel as alms1 it is not to be returned1 on account of the peace of the kingdom4 ,on the contrary1 it is to be received1 but it is to be given to the poor of the ,gentiles privately1 so that the king may not hear of it40 7,ibid47 ,here the oral law endeavours to pervert that kindly feeling which should exist between all the families of man1 and spurns a demonstration even of love1 because it comes from a man of a different religion4 ,at the same time its authors had not the moral courage to do this openly and honestly1 and if need be1 suffer for conscience sake4 ,they command that the proffered alms should be taken from the king1 as if they intended to devote it to the object for which he gave it1 and then privately to apply it to a totally different purpose4 ,this want of good faith shows abundantly that the oral law does not come from the ,god of truth4 ,the narrow bigotry of the system thus neutralizes all the individual trials of excellence which the oral law contains4 ,they appear beautiful only when viewed apart from their context2 but the moment we view them in relation to the other parts of ,rabbinism1 their beauty is gone4 ,thus the duty and extent of almsgiving1 as prescribed by the oral law1 at first sight appears admirable2 but the narrow spirit of bigotry by which it is circumscribed1 totally destroys its moral value in the sight of ,god and man4 ,almsgiving is lovely only when it is the offspring of charity4 ,god looks not at the mere outward act of giving money1 but at the heart1 and if there be no love there1 almsgiving is valueless in his sight4 ,and how can any one pretend that there is a grain of true ,god-like charity in a system which turns stranger into proselyte1 prohibits to help a brother because he is not of our own religious sentiments1 and refuses even to receive a kindness from one of a different religion8 ,just contrast this with the ,christian doctrine1 8,love your enemies1 bless them that curse you1 do good to them that hate you1 and pray for them which despitefully use you1 and persecute you2 that ye may be the children of your ,father which is in heaven3 for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good1 and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust4 ,for if ye love them which love you1 what reward have ye8 ,do not even the publicans the same8 ,and if ye salute your brethren only1 what do ye more than others8 ,do not even the publicans so8 ,be ye therefore perfect1 even as your ,father which is in heaven is perfect40 7,matt4 v4 #dd-dh47 ,but the oral law not only perverts and falsifies the true doctrine concerning charity1 but also misleads its followers by teaching them to think that almsgiving is a peculiarly meritorious act1 and will atone for other transgressions4 ,thus it is said-- 1 1 1 8,we are bound to be more careful respecting this commandment of alms than about any other of all the affirmative precepts1 for almsgiving is a characteristic of the righteous seed of our father ,abraham1 as it is said1 #8,i know him that he will command his children to do alms4' 7,gen4 xviii4 #ai47 ,by almsgiving alone it is that the throne of ,israel is established1 and that the law of truth standeth1 for it is said1 #8by alms 7literally in righteousness7 thou shalt be established4' 7,isaiah liv4 #ad47 ,by alms alone it is that ,israel shall be delivered1 for it is said #8,zion shall be redeemed with judgment1 and her converts with alms 7righteousness74'0 7,isaiah l4 #bg47 7,ibid4 c4 x4 #a47 ,according to this doctrine1 the man who gives alms has the merit of upholding truth in the world and helping to deliver ,israel from captivity4 ,but the following passage tells us that it will deliver from the punishment which he deserves1 and which is already impending over his head3-- 8,almsgiving annuls the evil decrees1 and in famine it delivers from death1 as happened to the widow of ,sarepta40 7,joreh ,deah1 #cdg47 ,and hence it is that1 as we have seen1 at the approach of the ,new ,year the ,rabbinists practise almsgiving abundantly1 and also1 that the survivors offer for the repose of the souls of their debased relations4 ,the tendency of this doctrine is obviously pernicious1 for it encourages men to persist in sin1 under the idea that almsgiving will compensate for all other deficiencies4 ,the doctrine itself is positively false4 ,where does the law of ,moses say that almsgiving can purchase forgiveness8 ,moses requires obedience to all the commandments1 and he enjoins the practice of charity to the poor1 but he denounces wrath against all transgression4 ,the doctrine of ,moses is not that obedience to one command will compensate for disobedience to another1 but that disobedience to one command will make obedience to others of none effect4 ,the doctrine that the giving of money to the poor can change the course of ,god's judgment1 or alter this sentence1 is very little short of blasphemy3 for it represents him as an unjust judge who can be bribed1 whose severity can be bought off1 and whose favour can be purchased with money4 ,a more degrading view of the ,divine character can scarcely be imagined4 ,such conduct in a human judge would stamp him with infamy1 and cannot possibly be true of ,him who is a ,god of truth and justice4 ,this one feature of rabbinic religion is sufficient to prove that it is the invention of men1 and of men too without any very exalted notion of justice and equity4 ,besides1 this view or almsgiving takes away all the virtue of obedience and love to ,god1 and turns it into a mere mercenary transaction4 ,the great beauty of almsgiving is that it proceeds from love to ,god and man1 and that its motives be mercy and obedience4 ,but the man1 who gives alms in order to atone for other transgressions1 or to avert the punishment which he deserves1 is not performing an act either of obedience or charity1 he is simply making a purchase and driving a bargain which is much to his advantage4 ,he has got money1 and with that money he can buy a house1 or a horse1 or deliverance from punishment4 ,it is1 therefore1 a simple question of interest4 ,he considers which will be the most profitable investment of his money1 and if he decide that deliverance from ,god's wrath is the most advantageous1 he lays it out in almsgiving4 ,obedience1 or love to ,god or man1 is here altogether out of the question4 ,can any one1 who has got the law and the prophets in his hands1 imagine that such a doctrine can come from ,god8 or can any reasonable being suppose1 that escape from ,god's wrath1 or the enjoyment of his favour depends not upon man's moral worth1 but upon his ability to give alms3 in a word1 that his salvation depends not upon the state of his heart1 but the laying out of his money8 ,this one doctrine1 if thoroughly believed and acted upon1 would overturn the whole law of ,moses1 and offer life not to the obedient1 but to the moneyed4 ,in this doctrine of almsgiving1 however1 the oral law errs at the very foundation4 ,it has chosen the ,hebrew word to stand for 8almsgiving10 whereas its true signification is 8righteousness10 as may be easily proved by reference to passages where it cannot possibly signify 8almsgiving10 as for instance-- 8,and it shall be our righteousness 7not our almsgiving71 if we observe to do all these commandments before the ,lord our ,god as he hath commanded us40 7,deut4 vi4 #be47 ,here cannot possibly signify almsgiving4 ,and again1 8,and he believed in the ,lord2 and he counted it to him for righteousness 7not for almsgiving740 7,gen4 xv4 #f47 ,and again1 8,o ,lord1 righteousness belongeth unto thee1 but unto us confusion of face0 7,dan4 ix4 #g71 where it is impossible to say that 8,almsgiving belongeth unto the ,lord40 ,the oral law is therefore guilty of perverting the meaning of one of the plainest and most commonly repeated words in the ,bible1 and of course of thereby giving an erroneous sense to the passage where it occurs4 ,thus it says1 as we have seen above1 8that by almsgiving the throne of ,israel is established and the law of truth standeth10 and it proves this assertion by referring to a verse of ,isaiah1 where the word occurs1 and which signifies 8by righteousness shalt thou be established10 but which it perverts to mean 8by almsgiving thou shalt be established40 ,here then the oral law is plainly convicted of falsifying the ,word of ,god1 and perverting its meaning in order to serve its own purposes and favour its own false doctrine4 ,to teach false doctrine is bad enough1 but to pervert the plain sense of ,scripture is a great deal worse4 ,either charge1 if proved1 would be sufficient to prove that the oral law is a false religion1 but here both charges are proved together4 ,the oral law here teaches that almsgiving can do that which it cannot do1 namely1 bribe ,god to have mercy2 and it supports its false doctrine by interpreting to signify 8almsgiving10 whereas it plainly signifies 8righteousness40 ,a religion guilty of such error cannot be from ,god4 ,it is for the ,jews1 then1 to consider whether they will persist in upholding the truth of a system which opposes the doctrines of ,moses and the prophets1 and perverts the ,word of ,god4 ,the great boast of the ,jews is1 that they are faithful to ,moses and to the religion of ,moses3 but this boast is vain so long as they profess ,judaism4 ,if ,moses were to rise from the dead1 and get the oral law into his hands1 he would not be able to recognise it as the religion which he left to ,israel4 ,and1 as to the commands about almsgiving1 he would not be able even to translate them1 for in his time signified righteousness4 ,the prophet ,isaiah would feel equal astonishment if he were to return and learn1 that the oral law quoted him as an authority for the assertion1 that ,zion is to be redeemed1 not with righteousness1 but with almsgiving4 ,and we doubt not that both ,moses and ,isaiah would protest as earnestly as we do against a doctrine based upon perversion4 ,but it is extraordinary1 if the ,rabbinists really believe their own doctrine1 that ,israel can be delivered from captivity by almsgiving1 that they should set any bounds to their liberality1 or ever stop giving1 until the desired redemption be effected4 ,if their doctrine be true1 then all that they so earnestly pray for1 is entirely in their own power4 ,they know the means1 and they possess the means of terminating this long captivity4 ,they need only to give a sufficiency of alms1 and1 according to the oral law1 even ,zion itself shall be delivered4 ,how extraordinary then1 that they should have suffered so many centuries of misery to pass over their heads1 and left their brethren to endure such calamities1 when liberality in almsgiving could have put a period to all their sorrows4 ,we think too highly of ,israel's charity to suppose for a moment that they would hesitate to make the sacrifice1 if they were persuaded of its efficacy4 ,we must therefore infer1 that they do not believe in the doctrine1 and ask them1 why do they profess a religion in which they do not believe8 ,footnote #cd3 ,literally1 8a stranger40 ,no4 ,,xl4 ,,priests ,,and ,,levites4 ,the great test of a man's faith in1 and love to1 his religion is his practice4 ,if a man live in open and perpetual transgression of its commands1 no profession can satisfy us that he is in earnest1 or that he really believes what his creed confesses4 ,now let the advocates of the oral law examine themselves by this test4 ,they profess to believe in1 and to love the law of ,moses2 and their great boast is1 that ,moses is their master1 and that they are his disciples1 but do they prove the reality of their faith by their obedience8 ,they sometimes tax ,christians with inconsistency in professing to believe in ,moses1 and yet in neglecting the observance of certain ceremonial observances2 but are they themselves more careful and less guilty in this matter8 ,we do not mean to allude to the weightier matters of the law1 love to ,god and man3 that is a question for the conscience1 not a subject for controversy1 but we refer to some mere external matters1 easy of observance1 and open to the cognisance of every man4 ,moses and the prophets have commanded that the priests1 the ,levites1 1 should be the teachers of the law1 and that from them the people should learn4 ,moses does not say one word about rabbies or wise men1 1 but restricts the office of teaching to the priests1 the ,levites3 now1 do the modern ,jews obey ,moses in this respect8 ,who are their teachers of religion1 and from whom do they learn8 ,are the priests and the ,levites the teachers of ,israel1 as ,moses commanded1 or are they taught by their rabbies and ,chachamim1 of whom ,moses does not say one syllable8 ,we assert1 that ,moses has commanded that the priests1 the ,levites1 should be the religious teachers in ,israel1 and in proof we refer to the words of ,moses himself4 ,in the tenth chapter of 1 ,leviticus1 he thus writes3-- 4 4 4 8,and the ,lord spake unto ,aaron1 saying1 ,do not drink wine nor strong drink1 thou nor thy sons with thee1 when ye go into the tabernacle of the congregation1 lest ye die3 it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations3 and that ye may put difference between holy and unholy1 and between unclean and clean2 and that ye may teach the children of ,israel all the statutes which the ,lord hath spoken unto them by the hand of ,moses40 ,here the nature of the priest's office is clearly defined4 ,it is1 in the first place1 to go into the tabernacle of the congregation1 and there to serve before the ,lord3 and secondly to instruct the children of ,israel in the difference between holy and profane1 clean and unclean1 and especially to teach the children of ,israel 8,,all ,,the ,,statutes10 which the ,lord had given to ,moses4 ,the commission is not only very comprehensive1 but very exclusive4 ,if the priests were to teach 8all the statutes10 there is no room left for rabbies1 or ,chachamim1 or any other description of teacher1 the priests are the only divinely-accredited religious teachers in ,israel4 ,if this passage stood alone1 it would be quite sufficient to establish the doctrine2 but it does not4 ,moses was particularly anxious to impress upon the ,israelites the nature of the priestly office1 and therefore repeats the instruction again and again4 ,thus in the law respecting a dead body found lying in a field1 after commanding that the elders and judges should come forth1 he adds-- 8,and the priests1 the sons of ,levi1 shall come near3 for them the ,lord thy ,god hath chosen to minister unto him1 and to bless in the name of the ,lord3 and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried40 7,deut4 xxi4 #e47 ,one should have thought that the elders and judges were enough in such a case4 ,but not so4 ,god had determined that the priests were to teach ,israel 8all his statutes10 and therefore commands that they should be present in this case1 that they should give the decision4 ,again1 when ,moses was about to part from ,israel1 and to leave them his dying benediction1 he was directed by the spirit of prophecy to impress upon them the same great truth1 and in the most solemn manner3-- 1 4 8,and of ,levi he said1 ,let thy ,thummim and thy ,urim be with thy ,holy ,one1 whom thou didst prove at ,massah1 and with whom thou didst strive at the waters of ,meribah3 who said unto his father and mother1 ,i have not seen him2 neither did he acknowledge his brethren1 nor knew his own children3 for they have observed thy word1 and kept thy covenant4 ,they shall teach ,jacob thy judgments1 and ,israel thy law40 7,deut4 xxxiii4 #h-aj47 ,and as this doctrine forms a part of ,moses' last words1 so also it is found in the last prophetic message which ,god vouchsafed to ,israel4 ,malachi1 the last of the prophets1 reminds ,israel-- 8,that the priest's lips should keep knowledge1 and they should seek the law at his mouth3 for he is the messenger of the ,lord of hosts0 7,mal4 ii4 #g73 so that if there be any one thing more plain than another in the ,old ,testament it is this1 that the sons of ,levi are the divinely-appointed religious teachers of ,israel1 and that it is the duty of all ,israelites to seek instruction from them4 ,it cannot be said that the priests are not now well known1 and that on this account these commands have lost their force2 for those who believe in the oral law1 profess to know the family of ,levi1 and in the synagogue1 at the reading of the law1 the priest and the ,levite are called up in a certain order3 1 8,at every time of reading the priest reads first1 and after him the ,levite1 and after him the ,israelite4 ,and the simple custom of the present time is1 that a priest1 even though he be an unlearned man 7amhaaretz71 takes precedence in reading before the most learned1 who is only an ,israelite40 7,hilchoth ,t'phillah1 c4 xii4 #ah47 ,and as the priests are thus supposed to be known1 so the oral law expressly maintains that they still retain their priestly office1 and are bound to discharge the duties of it1 so far as is possible1 in the captivity3 and therefore requires them to bless the people as ,moses commanded4 ,indeed the firm conviction of the ,talmudists on this subject is strikingly exhibited in their assertion1 that a priest1 although unlearned1 or even notoriously wicked1 is still not exempted from his obligation to perform this duty3-- 1 1 1 1 8,a priest who has none of these disqualifications for the lifting up of hands1 even though he be not learned1 nor accurate in the commandments2 and although his companions make a mock of him1 or his dealings should not be righteous1 still he is to lift up his hands to bless1 and is not to be prevented1 for this is an affirmative precept binding upon every priest1 who is otherwise qualified2 and we must not say to a wicked man1 ,away1 thou wicked man1 be thou disqualified from keeping the commandments4 ,do not ask1 saying1 ,what profit can there be in the blessing of this simple fellow8 for the receiving of the blessing does not depend upon the priests1 but upon the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 for it is said1 #8,they shall put my name upon the children of ,israel1 and ,i will bless them4' ,the priests perform the duty commanded them1 and ,god1 in his mercy1 blesses ,israel according to his pleasure40 7,ibid4 c4 xv4 #f47 ,the existence1 then1 of the priests1 and their continued obligation to perform such official duties as are now possible1 are fully acknowledged1 yea1 it is even asserted that a wicked priest is by no means to be prevented from doing his duty3 it has also been plainly proved1 from the words of ,moses and the prophets1 that it is the duty of the priests to teach1 and of the ,israelites to be taught by them3 and no man can deny that the performance of this duty is possible4 ,the destruction of the temple has prevented the priest from sacrificing1 but it has made no difference with regard to the possibility of teaching3 it is1 therefore1 a fair question to propose1 to those who boast in their obedience to the law of ,moses1 ,how is this ,mosaic command respecting the teaching of the law fulfilled8 ,are the priests1 the ,levites1 the religious teachers in all ,jewish congregations8 or have they been excluded from the office assigned to them by ,moses8 and is it occupied by others to whom ,moses did not give it8 ,every ,jew must answer that this command of ,moses is utterly disregarded--that the office of the priesthood1 as established by ,moses1 has now scarcely the shadow of an existence amongst the ,jews--that the rabbies1 ,chachamim1 and the ,melamm'dim are universally the religious teachers--and that hundreds1 if not thousands1 of the priests are left in utter obscurity1 and not a few in destitution4 ,jeremiah complained of the heathen-- 8,they respected not the persons of the priests0 7,lam4 iv4 #af72 but it is equally applicable to the adherents of the oral law4 ,here and there a son of ,levi may be a rabbi1 and then he has the honour attached to the rabbinical office2 but the ,mosaic institution of the priesthood1 as the appointed order of religious1 teachers to ,israel is utterly disregarded4 ,moses declares1 as we have seen above1 that it is the priest's office 8to distinguish between holy and unholy1 and between clean and unclean20 but if a ,jew has got a 1 a question or a difficulty1 it is to the rabbi that he goes to get the decision4 ,moses says that the priests are appointed by ,god 8to teach ,israel all the statutes which the ,lord hath spoken to them20 but now men are made rabbies and ,melamm'dim who do not pretend to be of the family of ,levi3 and there are congregations even where there is no ,levite nor priest at all1 and where1 therefore1 this command is utterly despised4 ,but the worst feature in this disobedience is1 that it is systematic4 ,it is not one of the casualties of the captivity1 but it is the deliberate aim of the oral law to degrade the priesthood1 as established by ,moses1 and to set up above it another office1 that of rabbi1 of which ,moses does not say one word4 ,the oral law1 instead of deprecating the possibility of an ,israelite congregation existing without a priest a son of ,levi1 quietly layeth down the law for doing without them4 ,when prescribing the order in which persons are to be called up to the reading of the law1 it says-- 8,if there be no priest there1 then an ,israelite is to go up1 but no ,levite is to follow him40 7,ibid41 c4 xii4 #ai47 ,and again1 8,but if the congregation has no priest at all1 when the reader comes to that part of the prayers he is to say10 c4 7,ibid41 c4 xv4 #aj47 ,now if the oral law were anxious to maintain the institution of ,moses it could make no such supposition4 ,on the contrary it would urge upon every congregation the indispensable necessity of having a priest or the family of ,levi4 ,the supposition shows that its authors cared but little about the commands of ,moses1 for where there is no priest it is plainly impossible for the people to obey that often-repeated precept to learn the law from the sons of ,levi4 ,and yet the authors of the oral law1 who care so little for this commandment of ,moses about the priests1 command the appointment of ,melamm'dim1 or schoolmasters1 wider pain of utter destruction-- 1 8,teachers of children are to be established in every province and district and city4 ,and every city in which there are not school children the men of that city are to be visited with the ,cherem1 and if they still neglect1 the city itself is to be devoted40 7,hilch4 ,talm4 ,torah1 c4 ii47 ,when we see them enforce this commandment of their own with such zeal and severity1 and yet appear so careless and negligent about the commandment of ,moses1 we justly infer that this neglect was intentional1 and that the object was to exalt themselves1 and to depress that office which ,god himself had ordained1 ,and this inference is abundantly confirmed by 1 the numerous and minute laws respecting the honour due to a rabbi1 whilst the respect due to the family of ,levi is almost entirely disregarded1 and his office evidently depreciated below that of the former4 ,as1 for instance1 in establishing the order in which captives are to be redeemed1 the oral law says the priest is to be redeemed before the ,levite1 and the ,levite before the ,israelite1 but then adds-- 1 8,in what case does this hold good8 ,in case that they were both equal in wisdom4 ,but if the high priest be an unlearned man1 and an illegitimate child be the disciple of a wise man 7chacham71 the latter is to have the precedence40 7,hilchoth ,matt'noth ,aniim1 c4 viii4 #ag47 ,here the office of the priesthood and even of the high priesthood itself is put below that of the rabbi or chacham1 and the intention of the ,rabbinists to exalt themselves1 and their utter disregard for the law of ,moses and his commandments1 is especially apparent4 ,the high priest was the chief person in the whole ,mosaic dispensation4 ,without him the blood of the offering could not be carried into the holy of holies on the ,day of ,atonement1 and yet the oral law says1 that if he and an illegitimate child1 that is1 the least honoured person in ,israel1 be both in captivity1 and the latter be the disciple of a rabbi1 he is to be redeemed first4 ,it is needless to add any further proof of the fact that the command of ,moses1 respecting the family of ,levi1 is systematically and intentionally transgressed by the authors and adherents of the oral law4 ,the priests1 the ,levites1 have been thrust out of that office which ,god gave them1 and others have been made the religious teachers of ,israel who have no right at all to this appointment4 ,how then can the modern ,jews pretend to be zealous for the law of ,moses8 ,they are living in plain and systematic violation of one of his plainest commands4 ,it will not do to say that the office of rabbi is also of divine appointment4 ,an assertion which nullities a ,mosaic institution must have the most unexceptionable evidence4 ,its proof must be at least as clear as the original appointment4 ,to persuade any real lover of the ,mosaic law that the rabbies have a right to thrust out the family of ,levi from their office1 and to take it upon themselves1 the express declaration of ,god is absolutely necessary4 ,and if the rabbies could prove1 which they cannot1 that they are the lawful teachers of ,israel1 it would necessarily follow that the ,mosaic law has been changed1 and then one of the chief dogmas of modern ,judaism1 the immutability of the ,mosaic law1 is entirely overthrown4 ,when ,moses gave the law the priests were the religious teachers of ,israel4 ,since the dominion of the oral law1 not the priests1 but the rabbies have been the teachers4 ,here then is an important1 yea1 an organic change in the ,mosaic constitution4 ,this change then is either unlawful or lawful4 ,if it be unlawful1 then the rabbies have no right to be the teachers of ,israel4 ,if it be lawful1 then to change and alter the ,mosaic law is lawful1 and then modern ,judaism1 which teaches that there can be no change1 is false4 ,this is the only alternative which modern ,jews can adopt1--they must either maintain the immutability of the law at the expense of the rabbinic office1 or they must assert the legitimacy of the rabbinic office at the expense of the law4 ,in either case the oral law is convicted of teaching falsehood2 and in neither case can the modern ,jews make a boast of loyalty to the law of ,moses4 ,they charge ,christians with disregarding and transgressing the ,mosaic law1 but let them point out1 even in the practice of ,gentile ,christians1 any one apparent transgression more heinous than the expulsion of the family of ,levi from the office to which ,moses appointed them4 ,the fact is notorious4 ,this family is every where neglected and in obscurity1 struggling with the cares and business of the world1 instead of occupying the station given to them by ,moses4 ,let all the lovers of modern ,judaism consider this fact1 and then ask themselves how they can pretend to be keeping the law of ,moses8 ,let them remember that they have themselves made a change in the law by appointing rabbies instead of the priests1 and that1 if they defend this change1 they teach the very same doctrine which they blame in ,gentile ,christians1 namely1 the mutability and abrogation of the ,mosaic law4 ,of course we do not mean to dictate to ,israel in this matter4 ,if they are conscientiously persuaded that the institutions of ,moses have been abrogated1 they can then consistently maintain the appointment of rabbies1 but let them give up their common1 though mistaken1 argument against ,christianity4 ,but if they believe what they so commonly profess1 that the law of ,moses is not1 and cannot be abrogated1 then let them act consistently1 renounce the oral law1 and restore the family of ,levi to the office from which modern ,judaism has excluded them for so many centuries4 ,to follow the oral law1 and at the same time to obey the written law of ,moses in this matter1 is plainly impossible4 ,the oral law is for the rabbies and the ,chachamim--the words of ,moses are for the family of ,levi4 ,the ,jews may1 and of course will1 choose as they think best2 but1 if they determine upon maintaining the rabbinical system1 let them not pretend to be followers of ,moses4 ,let them honestly confess that they do not like ,moses and his laws1 and that they prefer the new and modern religion of the rabbies4 ,the subject is important to all ,israel1 but especially so to the sons of ,levi themselves4 ,god gave them the important charge of instructing the house of ,israel in his laws1 are they then at liberty to resign their sacred office into the hands of others8 ,has ,god dispensed them from obedience to his command8 ,if so1 what obligation rests upon them to bless the people8 ,by lifting up their hands and blessing the people1 they confess that their office still continues2 and1 if so1 the obligation to perform all its duties continues also4 ,either the law of ,moses is abrogated1 or the priests are still the appointed religious teachers of ,israel4 ,the priests have the some alternative as the people1 i4e41 either to assert the rights and perform the duties of their priestly office1 or honestly to acknowledge that they do not believe in ,moses1 nor care for his religion1 but that their religion is that of the rabbies4 ,the responsibility is however much heavier on the family of ,levi than on ,israelites of another tribe4 ,to the sons of ,levi1 ,god committed the honourable office of instructing ,israel4 ,they have been set as the watchmen in ,israel1 and are therefore answerable1 not only for their own neglect1 but for the error and destruction of the people4 ,it is then high time for them to remember their duty and the zeal of their forefathers in extirpating error1 and to show themselves worthy of their high origin1 and of their divine appointment1 by opposing the errors of the oral law4 ,no4 ,,xli4 ,,rabbinic ,,ideas ,,of ,,the ,,deity4 ,it is an indisputable fact1 that the modern ,jews have entirely cast off the laws of ,moses respecting the priests of the family of ,levi1 and have chosen and appointed to themselves other teachers1 of whom ,moses says nothing4 ,what the cause was of such extraordinary conduct in those who profess a great zeal for the law of ,moses1 we do not now profess to inquire2 but we think that every ,jew ought to have a very good reason for thus wilfully1 systematically1 and continually transgressing the commandments of ,god4 ,he ought1 at the very least1 to be able to show that the doctrines of these new teachers are far superior to those of the religious teachers appointed by ,moses2 and that the superabundant excellence and wisdom of rabbinic teaching does1 at least1 justify the change which they have made in the ,mosaic law4 ,we have had occasion in these papers to consider the nature of the new doctrine chosen instead of the law of ,moses1 and to us it certainly appears that 8,the ,old ,paths0 were better4 ,to-day we propose to illustrate the rabbinic notions of the ,deity1 and do not intend by any means to select the most objectionable representations contained in the rabbinical writings1 but shall confine ourselves to a few well-known passages1 which are intended to explain to us the mode in which ,god spends his time4 ,concerning the day1 the rabbies say that it is spent in the following manner3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,the day has twelve hours4 ,the first three1 the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 sits and occupies himself in the law4 ,the second1 he sits and judges the whole world4 ,when he perceives that the world deserves utter destruction1 ,he stands up from the throne of judgment1 and sits on the throne of mercy4 ,the third1 he sits1 and feeds all the world1 from the horns of the unicorns to the eggs of the vermin4 ,in the fourth1 he sits and plays with ,leviathan1 for it is said 7,psalm civ4 #bf7 #8,the ,leviathan whom thou hast formed to play therewith4'0 7,avodah ,zarah1 fol4 iii41 col4 #b47 ,in another place we have an account of the manner in which the night is spent3-- 8,rabbi ,eliezer says1 ,the night has three watches1 and at every watch1 the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 sits and roars like a lion1 for it is said1 #8,the ,lord shall roar from on high1 and utter his voice from his holy habitation3 roaring he shall roar upon his habitation4'0 7,jer4 xxv4 #cj47 ,and again1 a little lower down1 the same assertion is made in the name of two other rabbies1 and the cause of ,god's roaring assigned3-- 8,rabbi ,isaac1 the son of ,samuel1 says1 in the name of ,rav1 ,the night has three watches1 and at every watch1 the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 sits and roars like a lion1 and says1 ,woe is me that ,i have laid desolate my house1 and burned my sanctuary1 and sent my children into captivity amongst the nations of the world40 7,berachoth1 fol4 iii41 col4 #a47 ,now we ask every reasonable man whether this is a representation worthy of the ,creator of heaven and earth8 ,we are told here1 first1 that ,god is like a man in observing day and night--that he has set times for different employments1 and a time for amusement4 ,we are told1 secondly1 that instead of comprehending all things past1 present1 and to come1 at all times1 and instead of upholding all things by the continual fiat of his omnipotent rule1 that he is obliged to consider each thing in succession2 and that1 like a poor frail child of man1 ,he can do only one thing at a time4 ,and thirdly1 we are here informed1 that the ,divine ,being sits all night1 and mourns like a child1 over an act which he rashly committed1 but now wishes to have undone4 ,is this a fit representation of ,deity1 or is it awful blasphemy8 ,how different is the description given by ,moses--8,lord1 thou hast been our dwelling-place in all generations4 ,before the mountains were brought forth1 or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world1 even from everlasting to everlasting1 thou art ,god4 ,a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past1 and as a watch in the night0 7,ps4 xc4 #a-d72 and again1 that other beautiful passage of the ,psalmist1 8,of old thou hast laid the foundations of the earth2 and the heavens are the work of thy hands4 ,they shall perish1 but thou shalt endure2 yea all of them shall wax old like a garment3 and as a vesture shalt thou change them1 and they shall be changed2 but thou art the same1 and thy years shall have no end40 7,ps4 cii4 #be-bg47 ,in both these passages1 unchangeableness1 entire freedom from all vicissitude and succession1 is presented to our view as the prominent feature in the character of ,deity4 ,whereas1 the ,god whom the rabbies describe1 is a being subject to the same alterations as ourselves1 and liable to change1 in its worst form1 that is1 to that change of will which ensues on disappointed expectations4 ,they say1 that their ,god destroyed his temple and sent his children into captivity1 and that now he is very sorry for it1 and vents the bitterness of his grief in lamentations compared to the roaring of a lion4 ,such a deity is no more like the ,god of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob1 than ,jeroboam's calves4 ,he may not be a graven image1 but he is nevertheless an idol1 not indeed of gold or silver1 but of the imagination4 ,nothing can be more different than the ,being described by the rabbies1 and that ,god declared in ,moses and the ,prophets4 ,and yet on this very point1 where the oral law errs so grievously1 ,christianity maintains the truth4 ,the ,new ,testament declares unto us the same ,being revealed in the ,old4 ,it says1 8,every good gift1 and every perfect gift is from above1 and cometh down from the ,father of lights1 with whom is no variableness1 neither shadow of turning40 7,james i4 #ag47 ,but the rabbies falsely ascribe to ,god not only variableness1 but imperfect knowledge also4 ,they say1 that ,he spends a fourth part of the day in the study of the law4 ,now either ,god knows the law1 or he does not4 ,if he does know the law1 then study is useless2 and if he does not1 then his knowledge is imperfect1 and either supposition is altogether unworthy of the ,deity4 ,indeed it is very difficult to argue against a doctrine so monstrous1 or to show the full absurdity where the subject is so grave and sacred4 ,but we put it to the good sense of every ,israelite1 and ask him whether he can believe that the ,god of knowledge studies in his own law8 ,is not such an assertion a blasphemous falsehood1 and does it not show that those who made it were themselves utterly devoid of all true knowledge of ,god8 ,some persons endeavour to excuse this blasphemy by saying that the words are not to be taken literally1 and that the rabbies employed oriental figures4 ,but this will not save the credit of the oral law2 for if we admit the figure1 we cannot excuse the blasphemy contained in the assertion1 that ,god studies the law one fourth of every day4 ,no man that has any reverence for his ,creator would venture to use such language1 not even in the way of a parable4 ,it proves in every case that those rabbies were totally devoid of that reverence which is due to ,god1 and therefore most unfit teachers of religion4 ,but1 further1 if these passages be figurative1 what is the real sense8 ,what is meant by studying in the law1 or playing with ,leviathan1 or uttering complaints at the beginning of every watch in the night2 or what is intended by ascribing to ,god one sort of employment in the day and the other in the night8 ,it is not enough to say that these are all figures conveying the most profound wisdom2 this assertion must be proved by showing what this wisdom is4 ,let the ,rabbinists explain these figures satisfactorily1 and they will then have some chance of being believed1 though even that would not amount to a proof1 that the authors of these passages intended that they should be understood mystically4 ,it is a certain fact that many of the rabbies have understood these and similar passages literally4 ,in the commentary on the assertion1 8,that in the second three hours ,god sits and judges the world10 we are told1 that some believed this so firmly as to think that on this very account the additional form of prayer1 called 1 was prescribed3-- 8,some say1 that on this account the words #8,let him turn from his place1' have been appointed in the sanctification of the ,musaph1 for this part of the prayer generally occurs in the second three hours1 when he is sitting in judgment1 and that we pray that he may turn from the throne of judgment1 and sit on the throne of mercy40 ,those who held this opinion plainly thought1 that the hours were literal hours1 and that the distribution of the day into four different employments was not figurative1 but real4 ,these persons1 therefore1 believed that ,god studies in the law1 that he plays with ,leviathan1 and observes the distinction of day and night4 ,and it must be confessed that1 if they believed in the ,talmud1 they had good reason for this literal interpretation1 as the corresponding passage1 respecting ,god's roaring like a lion at every watch of the night1 cannot be explained figuratively1 if it be taken in connexion with its context4 ,the context contains a discussion about real1 not figurative night-watches4 ,the question proposed by the ,mishna is1 ,until what hour of the night is it lawful to perform the evening-reading of the ,sh'mah ,israel 7,hear1 ,o ,israel78 ,r4 ,eliezer says1 ,it is lawful until the end of the first watch4 ,the ,gemara then considers what the rabbi could mean by this definition-- 1 8,what did ,r4 ,eliezer mean8 ,if he meant that the night had three watches1 he ought to have said until the fourth hour3 but if he meant that the night has four watches1 he ought to have said until the third hour4 ,there can be no doubt that he meant that the night has three watches1 and intended to say1 that there are watches in heaven and watches upon earth1 for the ,bareitha says1 c40----,and then follows the passage1 saying1 that in each watch ,god roars like a lion4 ,it cannot1 then1 be pretended that the night-watches here are figurative or mystical4 ,it is expressly said that there are the same watches in heaven and earth1 and the whole question is about the real distribution of time4 ,the following context is equally unequivocal4 ,r4 ,eliezer1 immediately after saying that in each watch ,god roars like a lion1 goes on to give the signs whereby each watch may be recognised even in the dark3-- 1 1 8,the sign of the thing is--,in the first watch the ass brays2 in the second watch the dogs bark2 in the third watch the infant sucks at its mother's breast1 and the wife talks with her husband40 ,this is plain matter-of-fact way of speaking1 and proves1 beyond a doubt1 that the whole passage is to be taken literally4 ,and if any doubt at all remained1 it is entirely removed1 a little lower down on the page1 by an anecdote told by the veracious ,r4 ,jose4 ,he says1 that he once went into one of the ruins of ,jerusalem to pray1 and that whilst he was engaged in prayer1 the prophet ,elijah came to the entrance of the ruin1 and very civilly waited for him until he had concluded1 when they had some conversation together4 ,amongst other particulars1 ,r4 ,jose relates as follows3-- 1 1 1 8,and he 7,elias7 said to me1 ,what sort of a voice didst thou hear in the ruin8 ,i said to him1 ,i heard a ,bath ,kol cooing like a dove1 and saying1 ,woe is me that ,i have desolated my house1 and burnt my sanctuary1 and sent my children into captivity amongst the nations4 ,and he said unto me1 ,as thou livest1 and thy head liveth1 it is not at this hour only1 but three times every day the voice says these words4 ,and not only so1 but when the ,israelites enter the synagogues1 and the houses of study1 and say1 #8,amen1 may his great name be blessed1' the ,holy ,one1 blessed be ,he1 shakes his head1 and says1 ,blessed is the ,king who is praised in his house2 but what profit has the father who sends his children into captivity10 c4 ,here we have the testimony of ,r4 ,jose to the truth of the fact1 that ,god does thus complain in the manner described above1 and we have the ,prophet ,elijah swearing that this happens three times every day4 ,it is plain1 therefore1 that the authors of the ,talmud knew of no mystical interpretation and intended none4 ,it was their simple belief that ,god observed the three watches of the night1 and at the beginning of each roared like a lion4 ,and if this passage must be taken literally1 why should the other passage respecting the distribution and employments of the day be taken figuratively8 ,the literal interpretation of the one furnishes a strong argument for the literal interpretation of the other4 ,and it is certainly of no use to ascribe a mystical sense to the one1 whilst the other is interpreted literally4 ,the advocates of the oral law gain nothing by it1 for the one is not more absurd nor more unworthy of the ,deity than the other4 ,nothing can exceed the folly of representing ,god as observing the night-watches1 and roaring like a lion for grief1 because he sent ,israel into captivity4 ,nothing can be more blasphemous than the assertion that ,god does not foresee the results of his own actions1 and that he is afterwards obliged to sit down and mourn over what he has done4 ,this one passage1 which cannot be explained away1 is quite sufficient to show that the rabbies were utterly ignorant of the nature of ,god2 and that1 however they might be acquainted with the letter of the ,law and the ,prophets1 they knew nothing of the real meaning of their writings4 ,this one excess of folly and absurdity entirely overthrows all the claims and pretensions of the oral law in which it is found4 ,but there is another feature in the passage which we cannot pass without notice1 and that is1 the total disregard of truth which it manifests4 ,r4 ,jose's story is evidently a barefaced and wilful lie1 unless we say1 that when he went into the ruin to pray1 he fell asleep1 and dreamed that he heard the ,bath ,kol and had this conversation with ,elijah2 but either supposition will equally destroy the credit of the ,talmud4 ,if it be a lie1 it is one of the most profane and wicked lies that can be imagined4 ,we have here a professed teacher of the law telling not only a falsehood about his intercourse with ,elijah1 but daring falsely to assert that he heard the voice of ,god mourning over the ruins of the temple4 ,the most profane and wicked lie that can be devised is that which introduces ,god himself1 and trifles with the sacred character of the ,deity4 ,if this story be a lie1 it oversets the ,talmud and the ,talmudical religion at once4 ,a religion built upon falsehoods1 must itself be necessarily false4 ,but if the other supposition be adopted1 that ,r4 ,jose mistook a dream for a reality1 what shall we say of a religion whose teachers tell their dreams as sacred truths8 ,and what shall we say of the compilers of the ,talmud1 who were unable to detect the folly and profanity of this narrative1 and actually inserted it in their oral law as an undoubted fact8 ,this supposition may save ,r4 ,jose from the unhappy character of a liar1 but it will not do much towards proving the truth of the oral law2 for there it is not given as a dream1 but as a fact4 ,r4 ,jose was silly enough to tell his dream as a reality2 and the rabbies to whom he told it were silly enough to believe2 and the most learned men of the ,rabbinists at that time were silly enough to embody it in their collection of holy and undoubted traditions4 ,we do not mean to ascribe any peculiar degree of folly to the rabbies4 ,persons calling themselves ,christians have been just as foolish1 have believed stories just as absurd1 and have handed them down as religious truths4 ,but then1 we do not receive these legends as a part and parcel of our religion4 ,we are as free to say of them1 as of the ,talmudic fables1 that they are wicked falsehoods4 ,but the modern ,jews tell us that the ,talmud is a divine book--that it contains their religion1 and that without it ,moses and the ,prophets are unintelligible2 and therefore we point out these fables as plain proofs of the falsehood of such an assertion4 ,we wish to direct the ,jewish attention to that system which they have called their religion for the last eighteen hundred years1 and which they have preferred to ,christianity4 ,we desire that they should consider what they have gained1 by expelling the family of ,levi from the teacher's office and choosing the rabbies as their religious guides4 ,we ask every ,israelite of common sense1 whether ,r4 ,jose and his companions are trustworthy leaders in the way to salvation2 and whether they are still prepared to follow the religion of a man who can only be acquitted of being a liar by admitting that he is a dreamer8 ,or1 whether they still choose to worship the ,deity proclaimed by the rabbies--a ,deity subject to succession of time--imperfect in knowledge so as to require daily study--requiring amusement1 and therefore playing for three hours every day with ,leviathan--and liable to disappointment1 so as to be obliged to spend the night1 in mourning over one of his most deliberate and solemn acts8 ,we are sure that every ,israelite would be sadly offended at being told1 that he does not worship the ,god of his fathers1 but a strange god1 invented by the imagination of the rabbles2 and yet1 if he worship the god of the ,talmud1 it is nothing but the truth4 ,the god of the ,talmud is certainly not the ,god of the ,bible4 ,israelites are often shocked at the folly and wickedness of those whom they see falling down before stocks and stones2 and yet1 if they receive the oral law1 and believe an a ,deity who plays with ,leviathan1 c41 the object of their worship is not a whit more rational4 ,they are just as guilty of idolatry1 and the only way in which they can clear themselves from the charge is1 by rejecting the oral law1 and forsaking that superstition which the rabbies have palmed off upon them as the religion of their fathers4 ,it is a most deplorable and melancholy sight to behold that nation1 which once was the sole depository of truth1 enslaved by a system so senseless2 but it is more melancholy still to think1 that there is not one among her sons who has the moral courage to denounce its falsehood1 and to vindicate the truth as taught by ,moses4 ,the priests1 the sons of ,levi1 were once zealous for the honour of ,god1 and united with ,moses in destroying the golden calf2 but where are they now1 and where is their zeal8 ,alas6 they too1 are found amongst the worshippers of the ,talmudical deity1 and uphold the system which has expelled them from their holy office4 ,no4 ,,xlii4 ,,title ,,of ,,rabbi4 ,that the people1 at present scattered over the whole world1 and known by the name of ,jews1 are descendants of the chosen people of ,god1 we freely admit4 ,that the ,old ,testament contains prophecies of their future return to the ,god and the land of their fathers1 and their subsequent happiness and glory1 we firmly believe3 but1 that the religion which they at present profess is the religion of ,moses1 we confidently deny4 ,modern ,judaism has not retained the doctrines of ,moses2 no not even with respect to the fundamental article of religion1 the nature of ,god4 ,our last number showed how widely the rabbies have departed from the ,scripture representation of the divine character1 and the number preceding proved that the ,jews haw not retained even the outward form of the ,mosaic edifice4 ,indeed we know not any problem more difficult of solution than1 to assign a reason1 why the rabbinic ,jews profess any respect at all for ,moses1 when they have rejected both the form and the substance of his teaching4 ,if they boldly denied his authority1 or asserted that the ,mosaic law was long since abrogated1 and the rabbinic precepts given in its stead1 we could1 at least1 give them credit for consistency2 but at present we cannot possibly divine their motives for professing attachment to the lawgiver of their forefathers4 ,their conduct for ages would appear to indicate a fixed determination to get rid and keep clear of every thing ,mosaic1 and that for the mere purpose of having something else2 for no one can pretend1 that the new law and the new teachers1 that they have chosen1 can lay any claim to superior excellence or antiquity4 ,of the value of the rabbinic teaching we have given many proofs2 and now think of examining a little the novelty of the rabbinic order4 ,it is certain that the word1 rabbi1 does not occur in the law of ,moses nor the prophets2 it is1 therefore1 clearly not ,mosaic4 ,this one fact does in itself go far to shake the authority of modern ,judaism and the oral law4 ,there we cannot go a step without hearing of the rabbies--,rabbi ,eliezer said this1 and ,rabbi ,bar ,bar ,chanah said that4 ,the whole oral law is made up of the sayings of the rabbies1 and yet neither their name nor their order was so much as known to ,moses our master4 ,the other favourite appellation of the ,talmudic doctors ,chacham1 or wise man1 does indeed occur1 and it appears from the prophets1 that there were some even in their time who laid exclusive claim to that epithet1 but unfortunately the prophets bring against them the very same charge1 which we prefer against their successors1 namely1 that they had forsaken the law of ,moses3-- 1 8,how do ye say1 ,we are wise 7,chachamim7 and the law of the ,lord is with us8 ,lo1 certainly in vain made he it2 the pen of the scribes is in vain4 ,the wise men 7,chachamim7 are ashamed4 ,they are dismayed and taken3 lo1 they have rejected the word of the ,lord3 and what wisdom is in them80 7,jer4 viii4 #h1 #i47 ,the rabbies will scarcely acknowledge that they have succeeded these persons in their office1 and yet if they give up such passages as these1 they must abdicate all claim to antiquity4 ,indeed some of them plainly acknowledge that the rabbies are a new order of men1 and that the word rabbi was not heard of until less than a century before the destruction of the second temple4 ,thus the ,baal ,aruch says-- 1 1 1 8,the first generations1 which were very great1 did not require the titles of ,rabban1 or ,rabbi1 or ,rav1 wherewith to honour the wise men of ,babylon1 or the wise men of the land of ,israel2 for behold ,hillel went1 up from ,babylon1 but the title of ,rabbi is not added to his name4 ,there were honourable persons amongst the prophets1 for it is said1 #8,haggai the prophet'--#8,ezra did not go up from ,babylon'--and at the mention of their names the title of ,rabbi is not added3 neither have we heard that this was begun until the princes ,rabban ,gamaliel the elder1 and ,rabban ,simon his son1 who was killed at the destruction of the second temple1 and ,rabban ,johannan ben ,zakkai1 who were all princes4 ,rabbi also began with those who were promoted at the same time1 ,zadok and ,r4 ,eliezer1 the son of ,jacob1 and the thing spread from the disciples of ,rabban ,johannan ben ,zakkai onwards40 7,aruch in 7 ,we need not wonder1 then1 that ,moses knows nothing of rabbies1 for here is a plain confession1 that the name was never heard of until a few years before the last dispersion4 ,it may1 however1 be said1 that the office itself existed1 though the name did not1 and this is in fact asserted by ,rambam1 when he says3-- 1 1 1 8,moses our master promoted ,joshua with his hands2 for it is said1 #8and he laid his hands upon him1 and gave him a charge4' 7,numb4 xxvii4 #bc47 ,and in like manner with regard to the seventy elders1 ,moses our master promoted them1 and the ,shechinah rested upon them2 and these elders promote others1 and they again others2 and thus we have a succession of promoted persons1 until the council of ,joshua1 and until the council of ,moses our master40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 iv4 #a47 ,and so he tells us that-- 8,king ,david promoted thirty thousand persons in one day40 ,according to this statement1 it would appear that there had been always a class of persons qualified to be teachers and judges1 and a pretty numerous class too1 from the time of ,moses2 but it is very extraordinary that their office should have continued fifteen hundred years without a name1 and that the nation should never have felt the inconvenience1 nor remedied it until the last few years of their existence2 and it is more extraordinary still that so large and important a body should never once be mentioned in the law or the prophets4 ,the land must perfectly have swarmed with them4 ,thirty thousand would have been a large proportion to the population of the land of ,israel2 but ,david made this number in one day2 and we cannot suppose that he exerted his right only once in his life1 nor that all the other doctors neglected the duty of raising up disciples2 and the oral law tells us that before the time of ,hillel every one thus promoted had the right of promoting others3-- 1 8,at first every promoted person could promote his disciples2 but the wise men gave the honour to ,hillel the elder1 and ordained that no man should promote except by permission of the prince 7the ,nasi740 ,according to this1 the number must have been very great2 and yet that they should have continued so long without a name1 and without any mention whatever by any of the inspired writers1 is perfectly incredible4 ,but there are in the account itself various particulars which excite suspicion4 ,david's extensive work of promotion in one day entirely exceeds the limits of probability1 no matter how the promotion took place1 whether by laying on of hands1 or by command1 or by letter3 for if we grant that he devoted the entire four-and-twenty hours of that day to the work1 still1 in order to make up the number of thirty thousand1 it will be necessary to believe that he promoted at the rate of twelve hundred and fifty an hour1 or twenty in every minute4 ,one such notorious untruth discredits the whole account in which it is found4 ,but1 farther1 the admission that the right of conferring the dignity of doctor was taken from those who had possessed it1 and restricted to those who obtained permission from the prince1 shows that the ordinance of promotion was not derived from ,moses1 but was an invention of men4 ,if it had been of ,moses1 the wise men could have had no authority to take it away1 neither is it at all likely that the numerous possessors of the right1 and least of all1 the disciples of ,shammai1 would have quietly resigned it4 ,we must suppose either that the wise men altered an ordinance of ,moses1 and thereby committed a great sin1 or that the ordinance of promotion was a mere human invention4 ,by the latter supposition the whole story of the continued existence of this class of doctors is given up2 and by the former supposition the charge of disregard for the law of ,moses is fixed upon the wise men1 and the value of their testimony taken away4 ,lastly1 the account of the manner of promotion is at variance with the above-quoted assertion of the ,baal ,aruch4 ,the oral law1 says that the doctors were promoted in the following manner3-- 1 8,they not only laid their hands upon the head of the elder1 but also saluted him with the title1 ,rabbi1 and said to him1 ,behold thou art prompted1 and hast authority to judge1 even in cases of mulct40 ,here the conferring the title of ,rabbi is made an integral part of the act of promotion1 whereas the ,baal ,aruch says that the title of ,rabbi was not in use until after the time of ,hillel4 ,the assertion1 therefore1 that the office of ,rabbi existed without the name1 even from the time of ,moses1 is not only unsupported by any proof from the inspired writings1 but is inconsistent with other assertions of the rabbies themselves2 and is1 besides1 found very close to a palpable untruth1 and is therefore unworthy of credit4 ,thus the antiquity of the rabbinic office is destroyed1 and appears to be a comparatively new invention3 so that those who profess the religion of the rabbies cannot pretend to have the religion of ,moses or of their forefathers1 but that of a new set of teachers1 who did not arise until a very few years before the destruction of the second temple4 ,one of the common objections of modern ,jews against ,christianity is1 its novelty4 ,they say that we have got a new religion1 whereas they have the ancient religion2 that we follow a new teacher1 but that they follow ,moses4 ,the foregoing examination shows how little ground they have for such a boast4 ,if novelty be a valid objection1 they must confess that the religion of the rabbies is false4 ,if the distance of time that elapsed between ,moses and ,jesus of ,nazareth constitute a fair ground of objection1 it is as valid against the rabbies as against the ,lord ,jesus4 ,nay1 if supposed novelty be the reason why they reject ,christianity1 they must now reject the religion of the rabbies1 and embrace that of ,christ4 ,we have proved that the religion of the rabbies is a novelty1 and every one knows that one peculiar feature in the teaching of ,jesus of ,nazareth was1 that he opposed the rabbinic doctrines1 that is1 he opposed novelty3 this opposition1 therefore1 is presumptive evidence that the ,lord ,jesus retained the ancient religion1 and has on that very account a claim upon all those who profess to venerate antiquity4 ,at all events the charge of novelty can be as fairly urged against ,rabbinism as against ,christianity1 and every ,jew who urges it1 is1 if he be in earnest about truth1 bound to compare ,christianity with the law and the prophets1 in order to ascertain whether it be a new religion or not4 ,one thing is certain1 that the ordinances of no religion can be farther from the ,mosaic appointment than those of ,rabbinism4 ,the ,rabbinists have rejected the religious teachers appointed by ,moses1 and have chosen others1 who cannot pretend even to any degree of antiquity2 and not only so1 but even when the possibility of having regularly appointed rabbies ceased1 they preferred those1 who in fact have no authority at all1 to those teachers appointed in the law4 ,the oral law makes promotion necessary to the exercise of the rabbinical office1 and limits the ceremony of promotion by two conditions1 first1 that it be conferred with the consent of the 1 as we have seen above1 and1 secondly1 that it be performed in the land of ,israel3-- 1 8,elders are not promoted anywhere1 except in the land of ,israel2 even although the promoters should have been promoted there themselves4 ,yea1 though the persons conferring the promotion be in the land1 if the person to be promoted be outside the land1 the promotion is not to take place40 ,now it is plain that these conditions cannot be fulfilled4 ,the great majority of the present rabbies have never been in the land of ,israel2 and even if they had been1 there has not been a prince for many a century4 ,for centuries1 therefore1 there has not been a rabbi promoted to the office as the oral law requires2 and yet the ,jews1 rather than have the priests1 the sons of ,levi1 still keep up the shadow of the rabbinical office4 ,a more determined opposition to the institutions of ,moses cannot be imagined4 ,first1 the ,jewish people rejected the ordinance of ,moses1 and devised an order of teachers of their own1 limited by certain conditions4 ,then ,god1 in great mercy1 made the fulfilment of those conditions impossible4 ,he took away the prince1 he drove them out of the land of ,israel1 to give them1 as it were1 an opportunity1 yea1 to compel them to return to his own appointment3 but in vain4 ,although the ,jews cannot fulfil the conditions of their own devising1 and could fulfil ,god's appointment1 they refuse the latter1 and have invented something newer still1 and that is1 an order of religious teachers1 who have not even the qualifications required by the oral law4 ,truly this is to transgress1 for the mere sake of transgressing4 ,how1 then1 can the ,jews pretend to be disciples of ,moses1 or assert that the ,mosaic law is unchangeable8 ,now1 for near two thousand years they have lived in disobedience to one of ,moses' simplest commandments1 and have changed one of the essential institutions of the law4 ,the most superficial reader of the writings of ,moses must see1 that a charge of prime importance was assigned to the family of ,levi1 not only as respected the ministration in the temple1 but also with regard to the instruction of the people4 ,god in ,his providence has deprived them of the former4 ,the ,jews themselves1 by rejecting the commands of ,moses1 have taken away the latter office1 and thus have destroyed not only the interior1 but actually demolished the external form of the ,mosaic edifice4 ,it is1 therefore1 as we have said1 a most difficult problem to account for the profession which modern ,jews make of zeal for the law of ,moses1 and one which well deserves the consideration of the ,jews themselves4 ,why should they profess to be disciples of ,moses1 when they openly trample upon his commands1 and reject both the substance and the form of his religion8 ,if they really believe that obedience to the law of ,moses is necessary to salvation1 they ought instantly to reinstate the family of ,levi in their office4 ,but if they prefer the new religion of the rabbies to the old religion of ,moses1 then they ought honestly to say so2 and not go on halting between two opinions4 ,and they ought to do this1 not merely to avoid the charge of inconsistency before men1 but to satisfy their own consciences before ,god4 ,how can any man reasonably hope to be saved by a religion whose commands he constantly transgresses1 and never intends to obey8 ,and yet this is exactly the case with the ,rabbinists with regard to the law of ,moses4 ,there have been attempts at reform amongst the ,jews1 but we have never heard of any who intended to restore the family of ,levi to their office2 and yet1 without this1 there is no return to the ,mosaic institutions4 ,a disciple of the rabbies may perhaps think1 that he can retort this argument upon the ,christians1 and say that ,jesus of ,nazareth was not of the tribe of ,levi4 ,certainly he was not2 but as the ,messiah1 the prophets foretold that he was to be of the tribe of ,judah3 and as the ,messiah1 promised and appointed of ,god1 he has a right to the obedience of all1 both ,jew and ,gentile4 ,if he had been only an ordinary prophet1 he would have had a divine right to teach the people and to require their obedience2 for1 besides the priests1 ,god also appointed prophets1 but to the prophetic office the rabbies do not lay claim4 ,the ,lord ,jesus1 on the contrary1 claimed not only the prophetic character1 but asserted that he was the ,messiah1 and proved the truth of his claims by exhibiting miraculous powers1 and especially by his resurrection from the dead4 ,as a prophet1 therefore1 and above all1 as the ,messiah1 his teaching in no wise interfered with the office of the priests3 and his conduct1 as recorded in the ,new ,testament1 shows that1 though in determined and constant opposition to the ,pharisees1 the advocates of the oral law1 he never lifted up his voice against the office of the priesthood4 ,on the contrary1 when occasion offered1 he showed a scrupulous regard for the commandments of ,moses respecting the priests2 as for instance when he healed the leper1 he 8said onto him1 ,see thou tell no man2 but go thy way1 show thyself to the priests1 and offer the gift that ,moses commanded1 for a testimony unto them40 7,matt4 viii4 #d47 ,and this conduct is perfectly conformable to one professed object of the ,lord ,jesus1 which was to vindicate the authority of the law against the unauthorized additions of men4 ,he professed himself the defender of the ,mosaic law1 and opposed the whole system of the ,rabbinists1 on the professed ground that they made it void by their traditions4 ,the objections1 therefore1 which we have brought against the oral law1 as overturning the institutions of ,moses1 cannot be applied to the doctrines or conduct of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,he never opposed the priests1 never interfered with their office1 never diminished aught from their authority4 ,in these most important respects1 the doctrine of ,jesus of ,nazareth is necessarily more agreeable to the law of ,moses than the traditions of the ,pharisees1 who have forcibly altered that great institution of ,moses1 the ,levitic priesthood1 and have themselves usurped the office and the rights of the priests4 ,modern ,judaism is directly in opposition to the ,mosaic law1 and has at present no excuse for its opposition4 ,the ,jews of the dispersion cannot possibly keep its requirements concerning the promotion of rabbies2 their adherence1 therefore1 to that system has now the appearance of mere gratuitous and wilful hatred to the law of ,moses4 ,they profess to know the family of the priests1 and could therefore restore them to their office1 if they pleased4 ,what is there to prevent them8 ,nothing but the want of love for ,moses and his institutions4 ,we are convinced that many of the ,jews have never considered this matter1 or they would not act as they do4 ,the habits of thought induced by early education1 the customs of their nation for two thousand years1 have drawn a sort of veil over their understandings1 so that they have not been able to see the palpable inconsistency of professing a zeal for ,moses1 whilst they do homage to principles which cut up his institutions by the roots4 ,until the priests be reinstated in their functions and their rights1 as the divinely appointed teachers of religion1 the ,jews can have no ground whatever to pretend that they are disciples of ,moses4 ,they are1 at present1 nothing but partisans of the sect of the ,rabbinists4 ,and if they choose to persevere in their attachment to this sect1 they are bound1 as honest men1 to renounce all profession of regard for the law of ,moses4 ,no4 ,,xliii4 ,,sanhedrin4 ,it is certain that the ,jews cannot appeal to the law of the prophets to defend their rejection of the old religion of ,moses1 and their preference for the new religion of the rabbies4 ,neither ,moses nor the prophets knew anything about the rabbies4 ,they are quite a new order of men1 never heard of until the ,jewish polity was tottering to its destruction4 ,there is1 however1 another argument to which they might appeal1 in order to justify the reception of new religious teachers1 and that is1 the existence of the ,sanhedrin4 ,it may be said1 that when the rabbies arose and taught1 both they and their doctrines were approved by this great council1 and that this approval is sufficient to establish the justice of their claims1 and the truth of what they taught4 ,indeed1 the rabbinists do actually look upon the ,sanhedrin as the great foundation on which the oral law rests3-- 1 8,the ,great ,council in ,jerusalem is the foundation-stone of the oral law1 and the pillars of the doctrine3 and from them the statute and the judgment goes forth to all ,israel4 ,they have the warrant of the law1 for it is said1 #8,according to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee1' c4 7,deut4 xvii4 #aa72 which is an affirmative precept1 and every one who believes in ,moses our master1 and in his law1 is bound to rest the practice of the law on them1 and to lean on them40 7,hilchoth ,mamrim1 c4 i4 #a47 ,here the indispensable duty of every ,israelite to follow the decisions of the ,sanhedrin is plainly asserted3 it becomes1 then1 absolutely necessary for us to examine into the nature of the foundation on which claims so unlimited are based4 ,one would suppose that1 at the very least1 the ,sanhedrin was infallible1 and could never say or do anything wrong2 for if this council was liable to error1 and yet undeviating obedience to its decisions required1 whenever they went wrong1 all ,israel must have gone wrong also4 ,but yet1 strange to say1 the infallibility of the ,sanhedrin is not only not asserted1 but plainly denied--yea1 the possibility of error unequivocally intimated1 and even provided for3-- 1 1 1 1 8,when a great council has decided by one of the rules1 and according to the best of their judgment1 that the judgment is so and so1 and has passed sentence2 if there arise after them another council of a contrary opinion1 the latter may reverse the sentence1 and pass another according to the best of their judgment1 for it is said1 #8,unto the judge that shall be in those days' 7,deut4 xvii4 #i72 thou art1 therefore1 not bound to follow any other but the existing council4 ,but if a council decree a decree1 or ordain an ordinance1 or sanction a custom1 and the thing has spread in all ,israel2 and there arise after them another council1 which wishes to abrogate the former things1 and to root out that ordinance1 decree1 or custom1 it is not permitted1 unless they excel the former in wisdom and in number40 7,ibid4 c4 ii4 #a1 #b47 ,according to this doctrine the ,sanhedrin in one generation may teach one doctrine1 and in the next generation another ,sanhedrin may abrogate all the legislative acts of the former1 and teach another doctrine1 and yet1 though one of the two must necessarily be in the wrong1 ,israel is bound to obey both2 and thus the law is made to sanction disobedience to itself4 ,nay1 more1 the will of ,god is made actually to depend upon the wit and the will of man4 ,instead of being eternal and unchangeable truth1 it must vary with each succeeding generation1 so that what was truth to a father1 might be falsehood to his son2 and every new ,sanhedrin would1 in fact1 have the power to make a new law4 ,how1 then1 can the ,jews pretend that the ,mosaic law is unchangeable8 ,here it is asserted1 that the ,jews are to receive1 as the law of ,moses1 whatever the ,sanhedrin may think right to teach--and that every new ,sanhedrin may overturn the doctrines of their predecessors1 and teach the very opposite2 so that instead of being eternal1 the law would be one of the most changeable things in the world1 and might never last the same for even two generations4 ,but how can any man possibly believe1 that a command so preposterous should come from ,god1 or that he would deliver over his people ,israel1 bound hand and foot1 into the power of seventy-one persons1 and require unconditional obedience1 no matter whether these persons were in the right or in the wrong8 ,pretensions so extravagant justly excite suspicion1 and entirely destroy the credit of those that make them4 ,they betray an inordinate lust of power1 and savour far more strongly of ambition than piety4 ,it was no doubt very convenient for the members of the ,sanhedrin to be able to reverse the decisions of their predecessors4 ,on these terms1 the law could never stand in the way of their own schemes4 ,no matter how it had been explained or understood before1 they had the power of giving a new interpretation to suit their own purpose4 ,it is truly wonderful how the ,jews can suffer themselves to be deluded by an imposture so exceedingly coarse4 ,a child ought to be able to see1 that ,god could never require a man to renounce his understanding1 and to receive two direct contradictions as true4 ,the manifest absurdity of this doctrine is sufficient to prove that the passage cited from ,deut4 xvii4 is misinterpreted and misapplied2 and a little consideration will show that it does not refer to the ,sanhedrin at all4 ,in the first place there is no mention of that council1 nor any thing that even implies a reference to such a body4 ,the command of ,god is1 8,thou shalt come unto the priests1 the ,levites1 and unto the judge that shall be in those days1 and inquire40 ,it is not said to the judges1 but to the judge 4 ,to these1 and not to the ,sanhedrin1 ,moses requires absolute obedience1 and that for a just and sufficient reason1 because1 as we have shown in ,number #b1 they had the means of obtaining an infallible answer by means of the ,urim and ,thummim4 ,it was the privilege of ,israel to be able to ask counsel immediately of ,god2 and it was therefore only rational to expect unconditional obedience to the command of the ,almighty4 ,such decisions were absolutely unchangeable as ,god himself1 for 8,he is not a man that he should lie1 nor the son of man that ,he should repent20 and no man in his senses would have thought of getting a sentence of this kind reversed4 ,these words can therefore by no means apply to a tribunal fallible in judgment1 and as changeable in its opinions as in the persons of which it was composed3 but if this passage does not apply1 there is no other in the ,bible which requires us to receive the decision of the ,sanhedrin as of divine authority1 nor in the oral law either1 for it supposes that this council was capable of mistake4 ,consequently1 the ,sanhedrin's approval of the new order and new religion of the rabbies is of no weight whatever4 ,the ,bible does not command us to believe that they were always in the right2 and they themselves tell us that they might be in the wrong1 and therefore might be in the wrong in their approval of the rabbies4 ,but the truth is1 that neither the ,bible nor history gives us any warrant whatever for regarding the ,sanhedrin as a ,mosaic institution4 ,in the first place1 it is never once mentioned either in the ,law or in the ,prophets4 ,the word ,sanhedrin is ,greek1 and so far as it goes would lead us to suppose that this tribunal was not instituted until some time after the building of the second temple1 and after the ,greek occupation of the land1 when the ,jews had become acquainted with the ,greek language4 ,this ,greek word would lead us even to suppose that the ,sanhedrin was instituted by the ,greek rulers1 and that they gave the tribunal its name4 ,if it had been an old ,mosaic institution1 the ,jews themselves1 who hated the ,greeks1 and that with good reason1 would never have given it a ,greek name3 and even if the ,greeks had assigned this name to a ,jewish tribunal1 which had previously existed1 the ,jews would not have adopted it4 ,it is true that there is also a ,hebrew name for this tribunal1 1 8,the great house of judgment10 but if this had been the original name1 it is not at all likely that the ,greek name would have supplanted it2 whereas if it was a ,greek institution1 and therefore had a ,greek name1 it is not to be wondered at that that name should have obtained general currency1 or that it should also be translated into ,hebrew4 ,the ,hebrew name will not do more than the ,greek to prove the antiquity of the tribunal1 for it never once occurs in the ,bible1 and it would be very strange1 if this council had existed from the time of ,moses1 that it should never once be mentioned4 ,the ,high ,court of ,parliament does not hold a more important place in the history of this country1 than the ,sanhedrin must have done in the history of ,israel1 if it had really existed3 how then are we to account for the fact1 that neither the historians nor the prophets of ,israel ever make the most distant allusion to its being8 ,if the rabbies speak truth1 the prophets1 the high priests1 and the kings of ,israel1 were mere ciphers compared with the ,sanhedrin1 for it had supreme power over them all1 and could try1 condemn1 and execute them1 and yet they are mentioned again and again1 and the ,sanhedrin passed by in mysterious silence6 ,there are two books of ,kings1 and two of ,chronicles1 relating the history of the ,royal rulers of ,israel1 but the ,supreme ,council of the nation1 the rulers of kings and priests1 the foundation-stone of the law1 the pillar of religion1 have never obtained even a casual notice6 ,is this at all probable8 ,would it be possible to write a history of the ,british ,constitution without ever once mentioning the existence of the ,parliament8 ,and yet this is what has happened1 according to the rabbies to the essential feature of the ,constitution of ,israel4 ,neither the lawgiver1 nor the historians1 nor the prophets1 have said one word about it4 ,the rabbies have felt the necessity of finding something or other in the written law1 that would look like the recognition of the ,sanhedrin1 and have therefore fixed on two passages which they think will serve their cause4 ,one is that to which we have already alluded1 8,thou shalt come unto the priests the ,levites1 and unto the judge that shall be in those days40 7,deut4 xvii4 #i47 ,we have already said sufficient to show that this passage is totally irrelevant1 and now add one remark more1 which is in itself decisive1 and that is1 that the constitution of the ,sanhedrin1 as described in the oral law1 is altogether at variance with the conditions laid down in this passage4 ,the oral law says-- 8,the command is1 that there should be in the great ,sanhedrin1 priests and ,levites1 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt come to the priests1 the ,levites4' ,but if they find none1 yea1 though they be all mere ,israelites1 this is lawful40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 ii4 #b47 ,according to this the ,sanhedrin was to consist of three distinct classes1 priests1 ,levites1 and ,israelites2 but ,moses does not say one word of the ,levites1 as distinguished from the priests4 ,his words are1 8,thou shalt come to the priests1 the ,levites40 ,he does not say1 8,the priests and the ,levites20 but simply1 8,the priests1 the ,levites20 from which it is plain that he was speaking only of that one class of the sons of ,levi1 who had the office of the priesthood2 but not of that other class1 whose only title was 8,the ,levites40 ,this is the first difference4 ,the second is like it1 inasmuch as it is also an unauthorized addition1 and that is1 that there should be ,israelites members of this council1 of whom ,moses does not say one word more than he does of the ,levites4 ,besides the priests1 ,moses mentions none but the judge 1 not the judges1 so that if the judge was an ,israelite1 there could at the very most be only one ,israelite amongst those whom ,moses appoints as the highest court of appeal in ,israel4 ,but if the judge was himself a priest1 then there was not even one ,israelite2 but the court was composed exclusively of priests4 ,this court cannot1 therefore1 be the same as the ,sanhedrin1 which was to be composed of all the three classes4 ,thirdly1 the oral law says1 ,that though the ,sanhedrin should not reckon one priest amongst its members1 but should consist entirely of ,israelites1 that still it is lawful2 this court can1 therefore1 never be the same as that of which ,moses says1 8,thou shalt come to the priests1 the ,levites1 and to the judge40 ,the court which the rabbies have appointed might not have even one priest1 and yet they ask us to believe that this is identical with that1 which1 according to the appointment of ,moses1 could never have more than one ,israelite1 but might1 and in the days of ,eli actually did1 consist exclusively of priests4 ,truly the rabbies must have calculated upon disciples with a most inordinate measure of credulity4 ,the man that would believe this1 would believe that black is white2 or as ,rashi says1 that his right hand is the left1 and his left hand the right4 ,and this is really what modern ,judaism expects1 and absolutely commands in so many words4 ,in ,rashi's commentary on the words 8,thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall show thee1 to the right nor to the left0 7,deut4 xvii4 #aa72 which words1 as we have seen1 the rabbies apply to the ,sanhedrin1 he says-- 8,yea1 though they should tell thee of the right hand1 that it is the left1 and of the left hand1 that it is the right40 ,of course men that expected from their followers this perfect renunciation of reason1 might say any thing they liked1 and might therefore ask them to believe that a court consisting of all priests was identical with one from which priests were altogether excluded4 ,but as we are not willing to give up that reason1 which we consider a noble gift of ,god1 we cannot help thinking that these two courts are as different as day and night1 and that the appointment of ,moses does not in the remotest degree serve as a warrant for the appointment of the ,sanhedrin4 ,indeed1 the sad perplexity of the rabbies to find out some passage or other on which to father their own inventions1 and the desperate necessity which they felt of appealing to this passage1 proves to us most satisfactorily1 that the ,sanhedrin is not a ,mosaic institution at all4 ,it is as impossible that there could be two supreme courts1 as that a man can have two heads4 ,moses did appoint a supreme court1 from which there was no appeal1 as is plain from the words1 8,thou shalt come to the priests1 the ,levites1 and to the judge10 and we have proved that this court is not identical with the ,sanhedrin4 ,but according to the rabbies1 the ,sanhedrin was a supreme court2 if1 therefore1 it had existed1 there would have been two supreme courts1 perfectly independent of each other1 which is plainly impossible4 ,it never entered into the head even of human lawgivers to be guilty of such absurdity1 and it would be an affront to the wisdom of the ,almighty to suppose that he had sanctioned it in his own law4 ,this one argument is in itself sufficient to overthrow the doctrine of a ,sanhedrin as taught in the oral law4 ,it was not only unknown to ,moses1 but is directly opposed to his own institution4 ,this portion of the oral law is1 however1 most important for proving the total disregard1 or rather contempt1 which the rabbies had for the institutions of ,moses1 and the motives by which they were actuated4 ,moses ordained a supreme court of judicature1 to consist exclusively of priests1 together with the chief civil governor for the time being4 ,the rabbies not only did not choose to obey the command of ,moses1 but actually abrogated his institution1 and set up another instead of it4 ,they were probably enabled to do this in the time of confusion which followed the ,greek conquest4 ,the ,greeks1 who cared nothing for ,moses or his laws1 naturally disregarded the priests and the lawful civil governor2 and therefore when they conquered the land1 set up a tribunal of their own1 composed not of those whom ,moses had appointed1 but of any whom they could find4 ,indeed1 to secure their own dominion1 their natural policy was to exclude those who had previously held the reins of government4 ,to this new tribunal they of course gave a ,greek name1 and called it in their own language1 1 or1 as the ,talmud pronounces it1 ,sanhedrin4 ,the ,jews1 whom they appointed members1 liked the power which it gave them1 and therefore1 when the ,greeks were gone1 endeavoured to perpetuate it2 and as they could not find a warrant for it in the written law1 declared that the institution was a part of the oral law3 and thus1 to gratify their own ambition1 trampled upon the law of ,moses4 ,this is the probable history of the rise of the ,sanhedrin2 but however that be1 it is certain that it is directly opposed to that supreme court appointed by ,moses1 and that it was love of power which induced the rabbies to sanction it4 ,they thereby depressed the authority of the priests and the civil governor1 and in fact became the dictators of the ,jewish commonwealth4 ,a tribunal supported from such motives1 and so directly subversive of the commands of ,moses1 cannot prove to any lover of the old religion the authority of the rabbies4 ,indeed1 the approval of such a body would go far to prove that the oral law and the rabbies were ,moses's enemies4 ,the ,mosaic law was first pulled down before the ,sanhedrin could be built up1 and it was founded on the ruins of the ,mosaic institutions4 ,we have not space at present to enter into the other passage which the rabbies cite in proof of the authority of the ,sanhedrin1 but hope to do so in our next number--not that it is necessary to the argument1 but simply because it is our earnest wish that the people of ,israel should see how the rabbies are in difficulty to find even a semblance of proof for the foundation-stone of their whole fabric4 ,that one passage from ,deuteronomy--8,thou shalt come unto the priests1 the ,levites1 and unto the judge10 is quite sufficient to prove that ,moses did not institute the ,sanhedrin but that1 on the contrary1 it must have been established by some determined enemies of the ,mosaic law2 and that it was perpetuated by those whose ambition led them to usurp power1 which ,moses had committed unto others4 ,we have thus another proof that modern ,judaism has demolished even the external form of the ,mosaic constitution4 ,the rabbies were not content with rejecting the religion of ,moses1 and casting out the religious teachers whom he had appointed1 but have also revolutionized the national polity4 ,moses ordained a supreme council1 consisting of the priests1 the ,levites1 together with the judge1 the chief civil governor2 but the rabbies have preferred a tribunal established by idolatrous ,greeks1 because this ,greek institution gave the power into their own hands4 ,no wonder that the ,god of ,moses destroyed their city1 and put an end to that delusion with which ambitious and wicked men deceived his people ,israel4 ,no4 ,,xliv4 ,,sanhedrin ,,continued4 ,the ,sanhedrin is1 as we said in our last number1 the foundation-stone on which the authority of the rabbies1 and the whole fabric of tradition rests4 ,take away this1 and not the shadow of an argument remains to justify the ,jews in their rejection of the ,mosaic religion1 and their demolition of the ,mosaic constitution4 ,but this we have done4 ,enough has already been said to make it probable that the ,sanhedrin1 with its ,greek name1 was invented and established by the idolatrous ,greeks2 and to make it certain that it is subversive of the ,supreme ,council established by ,moses1 and that1 for that reason1 it was not one of his institutions4 ,we have already disposed of one of the passages which the rabbies quote from the ,pentateuch1 to prove the ,divine authority of the ,sanhedrin2 but1 as they have1 with much difficulty1 found two1 we now proceed to consider the second4 ,it is quoted in the following manner3-- 1 1 1 1 8,how many councils 7or tribunals7 ought to be established in ,israel1 and of how many members ought they to consist8 ,ans4 ,the ,great ,council in the temple called the ,great ,sanhedrin1 ought to be established first1 and the number of its members ought to be seventy-one2 for it is said1 #8,gather unto me seventy men of the elders of ,israel2' and to them ,moses is to be added1 and as it is said1 #8,and they shall stand there with thee4' 7,numb4 xi4 #af47 ,this makes seventy-one40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 i4 #b47 ,here the rabbies have certainly found the number seventy-one2 but to prove that this was the ,sanhedrin1 they ought first1 to show1 that these seventy-one persons were not to be scattered through the tribes1 but always to remain together as one council2 and1 secondly1 that this council was to be permanent2 and1 thirdly1 that this council did really exist from the time of ,moses to the destruction of ,jerusalem2 and1 fourthly1 and most important of all1 that this was the ,supreme ,council2 for even if the other three points could be made out1 they would be insufficient without this4 ,the ,sanhedrin claims to be the ,supreme ,council1 and1 therefore1 if it cannot be shown1 that the assembly of the seventy elders is identical with the ,supreme ,council appointed by ,moses1 this passage is of no more use than the former one4 ,now1 respecting the three first points1 nothing whatever is said1 either in the ,law or the ,prophets4 ,and respecting the fourth2 even if we grant the three first1 we can shew that these seventy elders did not constitute the ,supreme ,council of the nation4 ,we have proved in our last paper1 that the supreme power was vested in an exclusive council composed of the priests1 together with the judge 1 but the seventy elders1 here spoken of1 were to be chosen promiscuously from the tribes of ,israel1 and therefore cannot be identical with that exclusive assembly2 and therefore did not compose the ,supreme ,council2 and therefore had nothing of the nature of the ,sanhedrin1 which pretended to be supreme over all4 ,thus it appears on examination1 that there is not one text in the whole law of ,moses1 which authorizes the establishment of such a council as the ,sanhedrin2 but that on the contrary1 it stands in direct opposition to that order of things prescribed by ,moses4 ,we can1 however1 go farther1 and show that all the particulars which the rabbies detail concerning it are manifest falsehoods2 and that1 if the ,jews choose to believe what the oral law says concerning the ,sanhedrin they most not only give up ,moses1 but renounce all the other inspired writers of the ,old ,testament4 ,the particular and exclusive duties of the ,sanhedrin are thus detailed3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,a king is not to be appointed except by the decision of the ,great ,council of ,seventy-one4 ,the minor councils through the tribes and towns are not to be established except by the ,council of ,seventy-one4 ,judgment is not to be passed on a tribe that has been entirely seduced1 nor upon a false prophet1 nor upon a high priest in capital cases1 except by the ,great ,council1 7,in mere money matters the tribunal of three is competent47 ,in like manner an elder is not declared rebellious1 nor a city dealt with as seduced1#ce nor the bitter waters administered to the suspected adulteress1 except by the ,great ,council4 ,neither is an addition made to the city nor to the courts4 ,neither are armies led forth to the wars of permission2 nor the elders led forth to measure in the case of a slain person 7,deut4 xxi4 #a1 c471 except by command of the ,great ,council1 for it is said1 #8,every great matter they shall bring to thee4' 7,exod4 xviii4 #bb470 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 v4 #a47 ,such is the power and jurisdiction attributed by the rabbies to the ,sanhedrin1 and which we have now to consider4 ,the mere reading over of these details is sufficient to convince any reasonable man that the whole affair is a waking dream of some man or men1 intoxicated with the love of dominion4 ,no man in his senses can believe that ,god could be the author of a despotism so dreadful over the minds and bodies of men4 ,in the first place1 here is an aristocracy of seventy persons1 described as having supreme jurisdiction over the ,king1 the ,high ,priest1 the ,prophets1 and the people--possessing the power not only to judge individuals1 but to pass sentence on whole cities and tribes1 and utterly to destroy them if they pleased--and this without any other law or precedent to guide them than their own will--and1 inasmuch as they were self-elective1 subject to no control whatever1 either of the king or the people4 ,we have heard much of corrupt corporations lately1 but any thing at all equal to the self-elective corporation of the ,sanhedrin we never heard of1 excepting another college of seventy-one1 the grand council of another oral law of later date4 ,it is vain to say that this body was controlled by the law of ,moses4 ,when the ,sanhedrin existed there was no law of ,moses1 but their own will4 ,they expounded the law as they liked2 and as we saw in our last1 were not bound even by the decisions of their predecessors3 and if any man dared to think for himself or to dispute their interpretation1 he was strangled3-- 8,strangulation was the mode of execution for any learned man1 who rebelled against their words40 7,hilchoth ,mamrim1 c4 i #b47 ,they had thus the power to make the law say what they liked3 and there was no power on earth to control them4 ,if they had been appointed by the king1 or elected by the people1 they would have been responsible for the abuse of their power2 but they elected their members1 and could be deposed by none but themselves4 ,a despotism so complete and so dreadful1 so inimical to personal security1 and so subversive of all liberty of conscience1 could never have been created by ,god1 but must necessarily be the offspring of the distempered brain of man4 ,we can hardly believe that many ,jews1 except the ,talmudistic zealots1 who might hope to be made members wish for the restoration of the ,sanhedrin2 and yet1 if they do not1 they do not believe in the ,jewish religion1 for the re-establishment of that ,great ,council is the consummation of ,judaism3 and if they do not believe in this religion1 can they consider themselves honest men in professing it8 ,but we must proceed to consider on what authority the rabbies make these claims to such extensive jurisdiction4 ,one would expect to find some distinct command of ,god1 expressly addressed to the council2 but no1 their only authority is the words of ,jethro to ,moses1 8,every great matter they shall bring to thee20 a plain confession that there is in the whole ,bible nothing to warrant their pretensions1 or they never would have taken refuge in words so totally irrelevant4 ,indeed1 we are rather surprised that they appealed to the ,bible at all1 for such an appeal is fatal to all their pretensions4 ,just let us examine some of the particulars detailed above1 by the light of ,god's word4 ,the first pretension is1 that 8,a king is not to be appointed except by the decision of the ,great ,council of ,seventy-one40 ,now is this true8 ,is it possible to show that any one of the ,kings of ,israel was appointed by the ,sanhedrin8 ,not one2 but it is possible to prove of many that they were appointed without any reference whatever to any such council4 ,take1 for instance1 ,saul1 the first king of ,israel2 what had the ,sanhedrin to do with his election to the kingly office8 ,nothing at all4 ,so far as man was concerned1 ,samuel1 and ,samuel alone1 was the instrument of his election4 ,when the people wished a king1 they did not go to the ,sanhedrin1 but to ,samuel4 ,he dissuaded them1 8,nevertheless1 the people refused to obey the voice of ,samuel40 ,would they have ventured to do so if he had been president of so dreadful a council as the ,sanhedrin8 ,when ,saul was anointed1 it was not by the ,sanhedrin1 nor by their command4 ,no man was present but the king elect and the prophet4 8,then ,samuel took a vial of oil1 and poured it upon his head1 and kissed him1 and said1 ,is it not because the ,lord hath anointed thee to be captain over his inheritance80 7#a ,sam4 x4 #a47 ,and when ,saul was solemnly confirmed before the people1 ,samuel was still the sole agent4 8,samuel called the people together unto the ,lord to ,mizpeh1 and said1 ,now therefore present yourselves before the ,lord by your tribes and by your thousands2 and ,saul the son of ,kish was taken40 7xi4 #ag-ba47 ,it cannot be pretended that the ,sanhedrin had anything whatever to do with the matter4 ,but let us try another instance4 ,let us look at the election of ,david2 was he chosen by the voice of the ,sanhedrin8 ,just as little as ,saul4 ,samuel was again the sole agent4 8,the ,lord said unto ,samuel1 ,how long wilt thou mourn for ,saul1 seeing ,i have rejected him from reigning over ,israel8 ,fill thine horn with oil and go2 ,i will send thee to ,jesse1 the ,bethlehemite2 for ,i have provided me a king among his sons40 ,and so ,samuel went and anointed him1 without any intervention whatever of the ,sanhedrin1 or any one else4 ,these two cases are sufficient to prove the falsehood of the rabbinic pretensions2 but there is one more decisive still1 and that is the case of ,solomon4 ,adonijah had made himself king1 and ,bathsheba1 by the advice of ,nathan the prophet1 took measures to make her son ,solomon king4 ,but to whom did ,nathan advise her to go8 ,did he tell her to go to the ,sanhedrin and to seek justice8 ,no1 but to go to ,david the king1 and to him she accordingly went1 and found him not in council1 or surrounded by the members of the ,sanhedrin1 but with ,abishag1 the ,shunammite1 ministering to him2 and ,david1 without asking any advice1 sware unto her1 8,assuredly ,solomon1 thy ,son1 shall reign after me40 ,the ,sanhedrin had nothing whatever to do with the matter4 ,the assertion1 then1 that 8,nothing was appointed except by the authority of the ,sanhedrin10 is a gross falsehood1 and very evidently made by ambitious men1 grasping after power to which they had no right4 ,in like manner1 we might appeal to history to show1 that the tribe of ,dan was judged1 and that ,saul1 ,david1 and the other kings of ,israel1 waged wars without once consulting the ,sanhedrin2 but there is one of these pretensions so directly opposed to the plain letter of the ,mosaic law1 that we prefer noticing it4 ,the oral law says1 that the waters of jealousy were not administered except by the authority of the ,sanhedrin4 ,but what says ,moses8 ,when the spirit of jealousy comes upon a man1 does he tell him to bring his wife to the ,sanhedrin8 ,no1 but to the priest4 8,then shall the man bring his wife unto the priest10 c4 7,numb4 v4 #ae47 ,what then is the priest to do8 ,is he to go first to the ,sanhedrin1 and get its sanction8 ,no2 as soon as the man has brought his wife1 and the offering of jealousy1 the priest's business is to bring her before the ,lord--8,and the priest shall bring her near1 and set her before the ,lord10--and is then to proceed with all the prescribed rites2 and the whole ends with these plain words1 8,and the priest shall execute upon her all this law40 ,there is not only no mention of the ,sanhedrin1 but immediate power is unequivocally given to the priest1 yea1 he is commanded to proceed without awaiting the decision of any other tribunal4 ,here again1 then1 the pretenders of rabbinic tradition are in direct opposition to the plain commands of ,moses1 and are therefore unfounded4 ,it is unnecessary to enter into more of these particulars4 ,the two which we have examined are contrary to truth2 and two falsehoods are quite enough to shake the credit of any claims4 ,the only possible way of establishing the authority of the ,sanhedrin1 in answer to this argument1 is1 to deny the authority of the ,bible4 ,there is no other alternative--either the authors of the ,pentateuch1 the books of ,samuel and ,kings1 are mistaken1 or the jurisdiction of the ,sanhedrin is a mere fiction4 ,moses commands a very different institution1 and the historical books represent a very different form of government4 ,he who receives these books as inspired1 must renounce the authority of the ,sanhedrin1 whilst he who maintains it must give up the sacred books4 ,there is1 however1 another tribunal mentioned in the above-quoted passage of the oral law which it is necessary to notice1 and that is the minor ,sanhedrin1 or council of twenty-three4 ,it is said1 8,the minor councils through the tribes and towns are not to be established except by the council of seventy-one20 and elsewhere we read3-- 1 8,in every city of ,israel that contains one hundred and twenty ,israelites or more1 a minor ,sanhedrin ought to be appointed1 and of how many members ought it to consist8 ,of twenty-three judges40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 i4 #c47 ,now this is another innovation for which there is no warrant whatever in the law of ,moses4 8,moses chose able men out of all ,israel1 and made them heads over the people1 rulers of thousands1 rulers of hundreds1 rulers of fifties1 and rulers of tens4 ,and they judged the people at all times40 7,exod4 xviii4 #be1 #bf47 ,this is the provision which ,moses made for the administration of justice1 but he says not a syllable about the appointment of minor ,sanhedrins of twenty-three1 so that in this we have another instance of the effort1 which the rabbies made1 to get rid of all the ,mosaic institutions1 and to substitute their own4 ,and also another proof that the laws of the ,sanhedrin were not given by ,moses1 for they require this ,council to appoint minor courts1 contrary to his ordinances4 ,it appears1 then1 from what has been said in these two papers1 that the ,sanhedrin was altogether an unlawful tribunal1 and that therefore the oral law can receive no support from its approval3 and it appears1 further1 that modern ,judaism has entirely subverted that order of things established by ,moses4 ,he ordained the priests1 the ,levites1 as the teachers of ,israel4 ,modern ,judaism has turned them out of their office1 and substituted the rabbies4 ,moses ordained a ,supreme ,council1 consisting of the priests and the judge4 ,modern ,judaism has destroyed that ,council1 and established the ,sanhedrin in its place4 ,moses appointed rulers over thousands1 hundreds1 fifties1 and tens4 ,modern ,judaism has put an end to that order1 and erected new tribunals of twenty-three4 ,in fact1 if it were possible for the ,jews to realize all the commands of the oral law in their own land1 and ,moses were to come amongst them again1 he could never recognize them as his disciples4 ,he would not find one of his institutions remaining as he left it4 ,it is quite absurd1 and if the subject were not so grave1 it would be ludicrous to hear the ,rabbinists exclaiming that the law of ,moses is unchangeable1 when they themselves have changed all its main provisions1 and made an entirely new religion4 ,but to the ,jews it ought to be a matter of very serious enquiry1 whether the ,mosaic law is unchangeable or not4 ,if the law be unchangeable1 then no rabbinical ,jew can entertain a reasonable hope of salvation1 for he professes a religion which has effected the most extensive changes4 ,in his creed he denies the lawfulness of change1 and in his practice he changes without scruple4 ,if the law be unchangeable1 it is the bounden duty of every ,jew to give up at once the new religion of the rabbies1 and to return with all haste to the institutions of ,moses4 ,but if he believe that the law is changeable at pleasure1 then he ought to renounce that article of his creed which teaches its immutability4 ,in so serious a matter as religion1 he ought to endeavour to be consistent1 and not halt between two opinions4 ,if ,moses be his lawgiver1 then let him serve him4 ,but if he be determined to continue in the new religion of the rabbies1 he ought to inquire into their character1 and the authority and motives which led them to overturn the religion of their forefathers4 ,is the religion of ,moses a bad religion1 which it was necessary to renounce8 ,or1 was it only given for a certain period1 and when that period had expired1 exchanged for a new one8 ,had the rabbies ,divine authority for the changes which they made1 or did they change it for their own convenience and interest8 ,the nature of the changes looks very suspicious1 they all added to their influence and power4 ,as long as the law of ,moses was observed1 the rabbies had no power either in ,church or ,state4 ,but by the changes which they made1 they became absolute despots over the bodies and souls of all ,israel4 ,they had1 thus1 every possible temptation to reject the one and adopt the other4 ,but is this a reason why the ,jewish people should also reject the law of ,moses8 ,they gain nothing1 and loose everything1 both for time and eternity1 by the change4 ,by adopting the new religion of the rabbies1 they give up the use of that most precious gift1 their reason1 in all that regards the law and service of ,god4 ,a ,jew1 who receives the oral law1 can have nothing but a blind faith4 ,he has lost the privilege of considering what ,god requires of him1 and must simply receive what the rabbies choose to prescribe as his duty3 and if they should even go so far as to tell him that his left hand is his right1 and his right hand his left1 he must believe in the decision1 and reject the evidences of his senses4 ,or1 if he should dare to doubt1 where ,judaism reigns triumphant1 he must be strangled4 ,there is certainly nothing very inviting in this system1 nothing that should tempt a man to prefer it to the just1 and equitable1 and rational religion of ,moses4 ,he gives the law of ,god into the hands of the ,israelite1 and says1 8,behold ,i have set life and death before you1 choose ye40 ,he deals with men as rational beings1 and requires implicit obedience1 not to the word of man1 but to the oracles of ,god4 ,he established a supreme council1 but did not permit that council to pass off their own opinions as infallible1 but commanded them to inquire of ,him who alone is free from error4 ,it is truly astonishing that so large a portion of the ,jewish people should still prefer the religious despotism of the oral law2 and it is more astonishing still1 that they should be deluded to believe1 that a system1 which has subverted all the institutions of ,moses1 is the ,mosaic religion4 ,but the most astonishing circumstance of all is1 that those ,jews who have detected the grossness of the delusion and have themselves renounced the practice of the oral law1 should feel so indifferent about the welfare of their brethren1 and so reckless of the interests of truth1 as to look on in silence2 or even appear to countenance error by joining in the rights and ceremonies of tradition4 ,even the tribe of ,levi itself has lost its zeal1 and abdicated the sacred office committed to it by ,god4 ,for eighteen hundred years there has not appeared in ,israel one single person zealous for the law of ,moses4 ,all have been content with calling ,moses their master1 and there the matter ends4 ,the priests and the people all unite in violating his laws1 and trampling upon the ruins of his institutions1 and then expect other people to believe that they are the faithful disciples of ,moses4 ,footnote #ce3 ,compare ,deut4 xiii4 #ac1 and ,hilchoth ,accum1 c4 iv4 ,no4 ,,xlv4 ,,sanhedrin ,,continued4 ,how a nation1 so acute and so fond of learning as the ,jews1 should ever have been imposed upon by so clumsy an imposture as that of the oral law1 is truly astonishing4 ,the exceeding folly of some of its ordinances1 the incredibility of the legends with which it abounds1 the extravagant pretensions of its doctors1 the grinding tyranny of its despotic tribunals1 all seem calculated to awaken doubt in the mind of the most credulous1 and the most ignorant4 ,but the utter want of evidence to support its claims ought to be sufficient to open the eyes of even superstition itself4 ,to establish the genuineness of an oral tradition1 an unbroken chain of witnesses1 from the rise of the tradition to the present time1 is indispensably necessary4 ,the succession of persons who received it from their predecessors1 and transmitted it to their followers1 must be clearly and accurately made out2 and the want of a single link1 or the existence of a single chasm in the chain of transmission is quite sufficient to discredit the whole1 and to invalidate the claims to genuineness4 ,to prove the genuineness of the 1 oral law1 it is necessary not only to point out a succession of persons1 but a succession of ,sanhedrins1 for1 as we have seen1 the ,sanhedrin was regarded as the foundation and pillar of tradition4 ,if a single chasm in history exists1 where a ,sanhedrin cannot be pointed out1 or if the assigned succession be inconsistent with the written and inspired records of the people1 the claims of the oral law are invalidated1 and the ,jewish nation convicted as the abettors of a pious fraud1 or the unwitting dupes of an imposture4 ,now we have already shown that the ,sanhedrin was not instituted by ,moses1 and was never heard of until after the ,greek conquest of the land of ,israel2 and hence it inevitably follows1 that the oral law is totally destitute of that chain of testimony1 by which alone its genuineness could be established4 ,from ,moses to the ,maccabees there is one continued chasm1 an immense and impassable abyss1 which separates between modern ,judaism and truth4 ,but as the rabbies have endeavoured to fill up the yawning gulf or rather to build a bridge in the air for the purpose of passing it1 we think it necessary to examine the success of their efforts4 ,they say1 that a chain of testimony1 such as is wanted1 does actually exist1 and have endeavoured to point out the various links4 ,if this prove fallacious1 then the last and only hope of modern ,judaism is gone2 to prove the fallacy does not require much argument4 ,the chain of testimony as pointed out by the rabbies themselves1 is inconsistent with history1 and wants continuity even at the very commencement4 ,the first part of the succession is thus described3-- 1 1 1 1 8,although the oral law was not written1 ,moses our master taught it all in his ,council to the seventy elders2 ,eleazar also1 and ,phinehas1 and ,joshua1 all three1 received it from ,moses4 ,but to ,joshua1 who was the disciple of ,moses our master1 he delivered the oral law1 and gave him a charge concerning it ,in like manner ,joshua taught it by word of mouth all the days of his life2 and many elders received it from ,joshua1 and ,eli received it from the elders1 and from ,phinehas40 7,preface to the ,yad ,hachazakah47 ,now here the want of continuity begins1 immediately after the third link in the chain4 ,that ,joshua should inherit the oral law from ,moses is very likely1 if there was any to be inherited1 but who was ,joshua's successor the rabbies cannot tell us4 ,it is not enough to say that the elders received it from ,joshua2 who were the elders1 and who was the next president of the ,sanhedrin1 and who was the president after that8 ,to make out a chain of witnesses1 we must at least have their names1 but ought to know1 besides1 their character1 their piety1 their probity1 before we can depend upon their testimony4 ,the absence of this detail shows that the rabbies had no information on the subject1 and were merely trying to make up a story to impose upon the credulous4 ,it is self-evident that if they had possessed an accurate detail1 they would have given it2 but as they do not1 we must infer that they had it not2 and as the ,bible gives no information on the subject1 we must assert1 that the chain of testimony terminates at the second link4 ,so far are the rabbies from being able to prove a succession of ,sanhedrins from the time of ,joshua to their own1 that they are compelled to make a grand leap from ,joshua to ,eli1 and thus to leave a chasm of more than two hundred years1 which of itself is sufficient to overthrow the claims of the oral law1 and to stamp the ,jews as the most credulous of men if they believe without any evidence4 ,it is true that the rabbies endeavour to stop up this great cavity with a great falsehood4 ,they say that ,eli received the oral law from ,joshua's elders1 and from ,phinehas2 which assertion implies that all these persons lived to be about three hundred years old6 ,and yet1 if it were true1 it would not be sufficient to make out the proof1 for which the succession of ,sanhedrins is absolutely necessary1 and especially for this period4 ,from the book of ,judges1 it appears1 that in the interval between ,joshua and ,eli1 and even in the next generation after ,joshua's death1 the people forsook the law of ,moses1 even the written law1 and gave themselves up to idolatry4 ,thus we read1 8,and ,joshua the son of ,nun1 the servant of the ,lord1 died1 being an hundred and ten years old4444 ,and also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers3 and there arose another generation after them1 which knew not the ,lord1 nor the works which he had done for ,israel4 ,and the children of ,israel did evil in the sight of the ,lord1 and served ,baalim40 7,judges ii4 #h-aa47 ,now1 here the inspired writer says that ,joshua and all that generation died1 which expressly contradicts the rabbinic assertion that ,joshua's elders lived to the time of ,eli2 and1 further1 he says1 that the ,israelites turned aside to idols3 where was the ,sanhedrin at that time8 ,if it existed1 why did it not stop the torrent of corruption1 and punish the transgressors8 ,and why was it necessary for ,god to raise up ,judges to do the ,sanhedrin's work8 ,we do not once read of the ,sanhedrin1 or any other council1 helping ,israel4 ,in the book of ,judges1 deliverance is ascribed solely to the judges whom ,god raised up4 8,when the ,lord raised them up judges1 then the ,lord was with the judge1 and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge4444 ,and it came to pass when the judge was dead1 that they returned and corrupted themselves more than their fathers40 7,ibid4 #ah1 #ai47 ,indeed1 that saying so often repeated in the book of ,judges1 8,in those days there was no king in ,israel1 but every man did that which was right in his own eyes10 shows that there was no ,sanhedrin either4 ,if any council of the kind1 armed with such despotic power1 had existed1 the children of ,israel could not have done that which was right in their own eyes4 ,whether1 then1 we look at the ,bible or at the rabbinic account1 we have a period of more than two hundred years1 during which there is no evidence at all either for the existence of the ,sanhedrin or of the oral law4 ,the chain of testimony1 therefore1 offered by the rabbies1 is not complete2 and is1 moreover1 unworthy of credit1 as it contains a gross falsehood concerning the age to which ,joshua's elders lived4 ,a little more examination will show us that it contains more than one falsehood4 ,after telling us that ,david received the oral law from ,samuel and his council1 it thus proceeds3-- 1 8,ahijah the ,shilonite was one of those who came out of ,egypt1 and a ,levite1 and he heard the oral law from ,moses3 but he was little in the days of ,moses1 and received the oral law from ,david and his council4 ,and ,elijah received from ,ahijah the ,shilonite and his council40 ,now1 in the first place1 this statement is very absurd4 ,to suppose that one1 who had heard the law from ,moses1 should at last receive it from ,david1 is contrary to probability3 but to assert that ,ahijah was a little boy in the time of ,moses1 and that he lived until the reign of ,solomon1 that is1 above five hundred years1 is manifestly a falsehood1 and1 whether wilful or not1 completely destroys the credibility of this attempt at a succession of witnesses4 ,if involuntary1 and the result of error1 it shows that the rabbies who have transmitted this story were so weak in intellect as to swallow any improbability2 and that as they transmitted one lie1 they may have transmitted more4 ,but if voluntary1 no one will argue that the testimony of wilful liars is worth much4 ,this last attempt1 therefore1 to prop up the authority of the oral law is vain4 ,but this rabbinic chain of testimony goes on to tell us that1 amongst others1 the oral law passed through ,jeremiah the prophet3-- 1 8,jeremiah received from ,zephaniah and his council1 and ,baruch the son of ,neriah received from ,jeremiah and his council40 ,now1 if this means that ,jeremiah was the 1 or ,president of the ,sanhedrin1 it is plainly false4 ,the whole history of ,jeremiah shows us that he was not the powerful head of a despotic and irresistible council1 but an unprotected and persecuted man4 ,had he been president of a tribunal so dreadful1 and whose sentence of excommunication was in itself sufficient to protect him1 the people and the princes would never have dared to reject his words as they did1 much less to make an attempt on his life4 ,but if1 on the other hand1 it be said that ,jeremiah's council does not mean the ,sanhedrin1 then we have another chasm in the succession of ,sanhedrins1 and consequently the proof fails again4 ,but this chain of evidence is not only contrary to fact1 and to the inspired writings of the prophets2 it is also inconsistent with the oral law itself1 for it asserts that two proselytes form a part of the chain of transmission3-- 1 8,shemaiah and ,abtalion1 proselytes of righteousness1 and their council1 received from ,judah and ,simon and their council4 ,hillel and ,shammai and their council received from ,shemaiah and ,abtalion and their council40 ,now1 according to the oral law1 it is unlawful for proselytes to be members of any council or tribunal4 ,respecting the ,supreme ,council1 it is expressly said3-- 1 8,none are to be made members of the ,sanhedrin except priests and ,levites1 and ,israelites of so good a genealogy as to be fit to intermarry with the priests2 for it is said1 #8,and they shall stand there with thee1' 7,numb4 xi4 #af17 i4e4 like unto thee in wisdom1 in piety1 and in genealogy40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 ii4 #a47 ,and even of an inferior tribunal it is said3-- 8,a tribunal of three1 one of whom is a proselyte1 is unlawful40 7,ibid4 #i47 ,if then1 it was unlawful for a proselyte to be a member of the ,sanhedrin1 or any other tribunal1 how is it that we find two at the head of one of those councils through which the oral law was transmitted8 ,if the decisions of the oral law be valid1 that council was illegitimate1 and therefore totally incompetent to the transmission of tradition1 and then we have a break in the chain of testimony even at that end which is nearest to the rabbies4 ,but if that council be considered competent1 then the oral law which condemns it cannot contain the true tradition4 ,but in either case1 the genuineness of the law is overthrown4 ,the sum of what we have said is this3--,that even if we were to give up our other arguments against the authority of the ,sanhedrin and the oral law1 and were willing to rest this question on the testimony of the rabbies themselves1 the defectiveness1 inconsistency1 and falsehood manifested in that testimony1 would be sufficient to throw discredit on all their claims4 ,they have not only no proof from ,scripture1 but are not able themselves to find in tradition an unbroken chain of testimony4 ,they fail at the very outset4 ,after producing two links1 they leave a chasm of above two hundred years unaccounted for4 ,when they take it up again1 they are convicted of gross falsehood in asserting that men lived1 after the deluge1 to the age of five hundred years3 and are not able even to make out a story that will agree with the oral law itself4 ,the most favourable ground1 then1 that can be taken for the defence of the oral law proves untenable4 ,but if to this we add the arguments contained in the former papers1 and remember that the ,sanhedrin is in direct opposition to the law of ,moses1 is never mentioned in any of the sacred books1 nor heard of until the ,greek language was spoken in the land of ,israel1 every support is taken from the oral law1 and it sinks down to the level of a mere imposture1 of which the ,jewish people have been the dupes and the victims4 ,how long they will remain so1 it is for themselves to consider4 ,the times of blind faith1 such as modern ,judaism requires1 are gone by2 the ,jews can therefore no longer remain the blind followers of the superstitious and ambitious rabbies4 ,either they must honestly confess that they and their fathers have been deceived for the last eighteen hundred years1 and earnestly set about seeking that truth which they lost2 or they most be content to be regarded either as interested upholders of error1 or reckless despisers of truth4 ,no one1 who at all knows the nation1 will ever believe that they are so weak in understanding as to be unable1 under present circumstances1 to detect the clumsy pretensions of the oral law4 ,some ,jews may1 indeed1 still obstinately refuse to investigate the evidences of their paternal religion1 and persist in professing ,judaism simply because their fathers did so before them3 but such persons must be content to acknowledge that their faith is not that of a rational being1 or that their religion will not stand the test of reason4 ,all who will take the trouble to investigate1 must1 if they be honest men1 make up their minds to renounce the religion of the rabbies4 ,there is not any one argument1 either of internal or external evidence1 in its behalf1 on which a man of ordinary understanding can rest for a moment4 ,the only shadow of a basis on which to support the oral law is the doctrine of the ,sanhedrin1 but this1 as we have seen1 disappears so soon as we approach the illusion4 ,instead of giving authority to the other parts of the oral law1 the doctrine of a ,sanhedrin appears one of the most objectionable of its many errors1 for it bears upon its front the stamp of selfishness and ambition4 ,it was an invention of men1 who aimed not only at a spiritual dominion1 but also at a secular despotism4 ,the ,sanhedrin was merely the engine whereby the rabbies hoped to get all the power1 both of ,church and ,state1 into their own hands1 and thereby distinguishes the rabbinical religion in the most striking manner from that of ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,christianity contains no apparatus for securing to its teachers the dominion of the world2 and therefore the professing followers of ,christ1 when they aimed at worldly power1 were first obliged to invent an oral law of their own4 ,jesus of ,nazareth seeks nothing but the dominion of truth4 8,when he perceived that they would come and take him by force1 to make him a king1 he departed again into a mountain himself alone40 7,john vi4 #ae47 ,his doctrine was1 8,my kingdom is not of this world40 ,and in like manner he taught his disciples not to seek after worldly power4 8,ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the ,gentiles exercise lordship over them2 and their great ones exercise authority upon them4 ,but so shall it not be among you3 but whosoever will be great among you1 shall be your minister3 and whosoever will be chiefest1 shall be servant of all4 ,for even the ,son of man came not to be ministered unto1 but to minister1 and to give his life a ransom for many40 7,mark x4 #db-de47 ,jesus and his apostles are perfectly free man the suspicion of making religion subservient to the promotion of ambitious schemes4 ,the teachers of the oral law had1 and even now have a temptation to uphold its doctrines1 because they make them the absolute rulers of the ,jewish people1 and this tendency is a strong ground of suspicion4 ,when ,god sent ,moses1 he preserved him from all similar imputation1 for though he possessed the supreme power during his life1 his claims were attested by miracles which could not be denied3 and at his decease his children were chief neither in ,church nor ,state4 ,the priesthood remained in the family of ,aaron1 and the chief magistracy fell to the lot of ,joshua4 ,thus disinterestedness distinguished the characters of ,moses and ,jesus from those of the rabbies4 ,the doctrine of the ,sanhedrin reveals but too plainly the motives by which the authors of the oral law were actuated4 ,of course we do not mean to ascribe the same motives to all the advocates of the oral law in the present day4 ,those motives are necessarily confined to those times when ,judaism can be realized1 and cannot1 therefore1 be called forth until there is a prospect of restoring the rabbinic polity4 ,our object is not to condemn the modern ,jews1 but to open their eyes to a true view of that system by which they have been so long deluded4 ,and if they should ask us1 ,where1 then1 is the truth to be found8 we reply1 in ,moses and the prophets4 ,for though we are ,christians1 we firmly believe that true faith in the ,old ,testament must terminate in ,christianity4 ,the only real obstacle in the way of a ,jew's receiving ,jesus as the ,messiah1 is the prejudice1 that his fathers1 who rejected him1 must have been in the right2 and this obstacle we are endeavouring to remove4 ,we have already made it appear that they were in the wrong2 and our late papers have removed the strongest objection that they urge1 namely1 that the sentence of the ,sanhedrin was decisive against his claims4 ,we have shown that the ,sanhedrin was altogether an unlawful tribunal1 not established by ,moses1 but1 as its name intimates1 by the ,greeks1 and modelled by artful and ambitious men for their own purposes3 and as the tribunal was unlawful1 so was the sentence4 ,indeed the fact that the ,lord ,jesus ,christ was condemned by an unlawful tribunal is a testimony in his favour4 ,it shows that he disapproved of and opposed their unlawful doings4 ,jesus was not condemned by the friends of ,moses1 but by his enemies4 ,the religion of ,christ was persecuted1 not by those who conscientiously kept ,moses' commands1 but by those who had first defaced every feature of ,mosaism4 ,the men who condemned the ,lord ,jesus were the tyrannical usurpers of an authority which ,moses had given to others2 and if ,moses himself had appeared amongst them1 and asserted the rights of the priests and ,levites against the rabbies1 they would just as readily have crucified him as the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,the ,jews1 therefore1 of the present day1 who approve the condemnation of ,jesus1 unite with the enemies of ,moses2 but those who are lovers of the ,mosaic law must approve the efforts of ,jesus to deliver it from the corruptions or wicked and ambitious men4 ,an unlawful tribunal condemned him for doing what every true ,jew must acknowledge to be right4 ,whether1 then1 they acknowledge him as the ,messiah1 or not1 they must confess that he died a martyr to his zeal for the law of ,moses1 and are1 therefore1 bound to re-consider his claims4 ,jesus was put to death1 not because he violated the ,mosaic precepts1 but because he reproved others for their transgressions--not because he endeavoured to overturn the religion of ,moses1 but because he resolutely defended its truth against those who were introducing a new religion upon its ruins4 ,no4 ,,xlvi4 ,,contempt ,,for ,,the ,,female ,,character4 ,modern ,judaism1 or the religion of the oral law1 cannot bear the slightest investigation4 ,its existence depends altogether upon a blind faith4 ,as long as a man is willing to deliver up his understanding into the hands of the rabbies1 and at their bidding believe that his right hand is his left1 as they require2 so long he may be a zealous professor of ,judaism4 ,but1 the moment that he begins to think and to reason1 and to compare his traditional faith with the doctrines of ,moses and the prophets1 he must begin to doubt1 and if he really has a love for the law of ,god1 he must ultimately renounce that superstition which caused the destruction of the temple and all the subsequent calamities of his people1 and still enslaves the greatest portion of his nation4 ,it matters not at which point he views it--its theoretic principles and its practical effects equally condemn it1 and prove that it is so far from being a revelation from ,god1 that it is not even the work of good or wise men4 ,the doctrine of the ,sanhedrin1 which we lately considered1 exhibits it as a spiritual despotism the most intolerable2 but the utter contempt with which it looks down upon the female portion of mankind makes it to this hour a positive curse to the daughters of ,israel1 and proves that it does not proceed from ,him who created male and female1 and pronounced a blessing upon the one as well as the other4 ,one of the prominent characteristics in every false religion is the degradation of womankind4 ,the ,mahometan imposture debases women to the level of the brute creation4 ,judaism places them in the same category with slaves4 ,in ,mahometan countries1 women are deprived of all culture of head and heart4 ,rabbinism1 as we saw in ,no4 #c1 pronounces that fathers are exempt from all obligation to teach their daughters the law of the lord3 but we must proceed to consider fully the estimate which ,rabbinism teaches the ,jews to form of their daughters1 their sisters1 their mothers1 and even the wife of their bosom3 and in doing this we shall not go to the opinions of the ignorant1 the vicious1 or the superstitious1 but to the standard books of the nation4 ,it is not possible to produce in ,english much of the slanderous assertions contained in the ,talmud2 many are too bad for translation1 but still enough can be brought forward to prove satisfactorily that the rabbies look upon womankind with contempt4 ,it is generally agreed that ,rambam1 or ,maimonides1 was one of the most learned and enlightened of the rabbies1 and yet the contempt which he felt for the female head and heart appears very plainly in the following passage3-- 1 1 1 1 8,let not any man say1 ,behold ,i perform the commandments of the law1 and study in its wisdom1 in order to obtain the blessings written therein1 or to be worthy of the life of the world to come3 and ,i abstain from the transgressions against which it warns1 in order to be delivered from the curses written in the law1 or that ,i may not be cut off from eternal life4 ,it is not right to serve ,god in this way1 for he that serves thus1 serves from fear1 and that is not the degree to which the prophets and wise men attained4 ,no one serves ,god in this way1 except unlearned men 7,amharatzin71 women1 and children1 whom they accustom to serve from fear1 until their understanding increases1 so that they may serve from love40 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 x4 #a47 ,here ,maimonides sinks women down to the level of children1 and even classes their moral and intellectual faculties with those of the despised ,amharatzin4 ,we saw in ,no4 #a that an amhaaretz is of so little value1 that his life is not considered more precious than that of a fish1 and such it appears was ,rambam's estimate of the value of a woman4 ,this most learned rabbi considered it impossible for a woman to love ,god or to serve him aright2 and when he wished to warn the ,jews against serving ,god in an erroneous manner1 he actually tells them not to serve ,him as the women do4 ,a more debasing imputation cannot be cast upon a human being than this1 that he is physically incapable of loving ,god or serving ,him aright4 ,if he had asserted that since the fall of ,adam1 the whole human race is far gone from original righteousness1 and that therefore the love of ,god is not in them1 he would have said what is asserted in ,scripture3 but the opinion that women1 that is1 one half of the human species1 have a physical incapacity to love and serve ,god2 and that we are to regard them as a sort of finger-post for pointing out error1 or a notorious example of that irreligion which we are to avoid1 is to blaspheme the ,creator1 and to hold up the whole female sex to the universal scorn of their sons1 their brothers1 and their husbands4 ,it may be said1 in palliation of so foul a libel1 that ,rambam lived amongst ,mahometans1 and that he insensibly imbibed the opinions of the followers of the false prophet4 ,now it is most true that he could never have learned this sentiment from ,christians4 ,the ,new ,testament does not teach us to look upon women as ,amharatzin1 but to regard them as rational and responsible beings1 capable of doing ,god the same acceptable service as men1 liable to the same awful judgment1 and partakers of the same blessed hope4 ,this apology1 if true1 would only serve to excuse ,rambam3 it would not defend the sentiment itself1 but on the contrary1 stamp it as ,mahometan4 ,it is not true1 however1 that ,rambam imbibed this notion from intercourse with ,mahometans3 he learned it in the oral law1 which has such a low opinion of women as to pronounce their testimony invalid4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,there are ten sorts of disqualification1 and every one in whom any one of them is found1 he is disqualified from giving evidence2 and these are they--women1 slaves1 children1 idiots1 deaf persons1 the blind1 the wicked1 the despised1 relations1 and those interested in their testimony--behold these are ten40 7,hilchoth ,eduth41 c4 ix4 #a47 ,now1 it will be observed that these ten classes may be reduced to two--those who are disqualified by physical or intellectual infirmity1 as children1 idiots1 deaf and blind persons2 and secondly1 those whose moral integrity is exposed to suspicion1 as slaves1 wicked and despised persons1 relations1 and those who have an interest in the cause4 ,to one of these two classes women must belong3 they are disqualified either because of incapacity1 or because their moral feeling may not be trusted1 and in either case are treated with a most unmerited contempt4 ,it is true1 that the rabbies endeavour to prove that the law of ,moses excludes women from giving testimony1 saying-- 8,women are disqualified by the law from giving testimony1 for it is said1 #8,at the mouth of two witnesses1' where the word witness is of the masculine1 not the feminine gender20 but this proof is altogether inconclusive2 on the same principle it might be proved that women might break all the ten commandments1 for they are all given in the masculine gender4 ,indeed it is self-evident that ,god could not have given a law so absurd4 ,there are thousands of cases1 where1 if women could not give evidence1 all the ends of justice would be defeated4 ,take1 for instance1 the famous judgment of ,solomon1 where the two women laid claim each to the living child4 ,in this case there could be no testimony but that of the women themselves1 and ,solomon did not send them away because they were women4 ,take also the case of ,boaz and ,ruth4 ,when ,boaz wished to marry ,ruth1 it was necessary first to redeem the inheritance1 and for this it was absolutely necessary to prove that ,ruth was the wife of ,naomi's son4 ,but there was no testimony but that of the women themselves4 ,elimelech1 ,chilion1 and ,mahlon1 were all dead1 and the marriage had taken place in a foreign land1 yet we do not read of any difficulties being raised4 ,boaz himself1 ,naomi's kinsman1 and the elders of ,israel1 appear all to have been perfectly satisfied4 ,the disqualification of women1 therefore1 was not ordained by ,moses1 but is the invention of the rabbies1 and shows that the rabbies had so low an opinion of the intellect or the integrity of women1 as to think either that women are so half-witted as not to be fit to give testimony1 or so dishonest as not to be trusted in the testimony which they may give4 ,but this degradation of the female character is not confined to the rabbinic courts of law4 ,they have dared to carry it even into the house of ,god1 and to make it prominent in the public worship of the ,creator4 ,the oral law has ordained that no public worship1 nor indeed many religious solemnities1 can be performed1 unless there be ten persons present1 but from this number it has carefully excluded the women1 determining that-- 8,it is necessary that all these ten be free and adult men40 7,orach ,chaiim1 #ee47 ,so that if there should be ten thousand women in the synagogue1 they are counted as nobody1 and unless there be ten men there can be no service4 ,hence it is that the daughters of ,israel are never suffered to appear as participators in the worship of ,god1 but are compelled to look on from a distance1 as if they had neither part nor lot in the matter4 ,now what reason is there why women should not be regarded as worshippers8 ,are they not rational beings8 are they not creatures of ,god8 are they not heirs of immortality just as well as the men8 ,will they not join in the praises of the redeemed in ,paradise2 or is the ,mahometan doctrine true1 that women have no souls8 ,certainly1 when one looks at the ,jewish synagogue1 one would think so4 ,before marriage the women never go there at all1 and after marriage how seldom4 ,on the ,barbary coast they hardly ever go1 and in ,poland how common is it1 whilst the men are in the synagogue at prayer1 to see their wives outside loitering and chatting1 as if the public worship of ,god was no concern of theirs4 ,even in this country the attendance of females is not at all equal to that of the men4 ,how contrary is this state of things to the command of ,god in the ,psalms1 8,both young men and maidens2 old men and children2 let them praise the name of the ,lord40 7,psalm cxlviii4 #ab1 #ac47 ,and again1 8,let every thing that hath breath praise the ,lord40 7,psalm cl4 #f47 ,how different is the condition of the ,jewish females under the oral law1 from that described by ,moses3--8,when ,miriam1 the prophetess1 the sister of ,aaron1 took a timbrel in her hand2 and all the women went out after her1 with timbrels and with dances4 ,and ,miriam answered them1 ,sing ye to the ,lord1 for he hath triumphed gloriously40 7,exod4 xi4 #ba47 ,then the women were permitted to unite in the noblest work that can engage the soul of human beings1 the praises of our ,god4 ,but now they are shut out1 according to the ordinance of the rabbies--they are not reckoned amongst ,god's worshippers1 and if ten thousand of them should go to the synagogue1 unless there should also be a sufficient number of men1 a disciple of the rabbies would count them as nobody1 and not think it worth his while to read prayers for them4 ,a law like this cannot possibly proceed from ,god1 ,he makes no such difference between male and female4 8,he delighteth not in the strength of the horse2 he taketh not pleasure in the legs of a man40 7,ps4 cxlvii4 #aj47 8,the sacrifices of ,god are a broken spirit2 a broken and contrite heart1 ,o ,god1 thou wilt not despise0 7,ps4 li4 #ag72 no matter whether it be male or female4 ,but the oral law is not content with degrading women by refusing to number them as a part of the congregation1 it actually prescribes a form of daily prayer expressive of their contempt4 ,every day the men say-- 8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord1 our ,god6 king of the universe1 who hath not made me a woman40 ,whilst the women are directed to say-- 8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,lord our ,god6 ,king of the universe1 who hath made me according to his will40 7,daily ,prayers1 p4 #f47 ,the proud benediction of the men is founded altogether on the oral law1 which promises rewards not to the state of the heart1 but to the external operation of keeping ,god's commands1 and as many of them cannot be kept by the women1 intimates that the men will have a greater reward4 ,this prayer1 or rather thanksgiving1 refers especially to the study of the law1 from which they suppose the woman to be dispensed1 and for which they expect no small reward in the world to come1 and upon which they pride themselves1 particularly in this present life4 ,the man who remembers the day of judgment1 when the secrets of all hearts shall be revealed1 or bears in mind that the distinction of sex1 like the difference of rank or office or nationality1 is only for this world1 will find but little reason for offering up any such thanksgiving4 ,he knows that ,god will render to every human being1 not according to sex1 but according to deeds2 and feeling that all1 both male and female1 are sinners1 will see that such arrogance is unbecoming at all times1 and particularly odious at the moment when he comes to ask pardon of ,him 8who spieth out all our ways40 ,instead of despising others1 under the pretence of thanking ,god1 the truly devout man will be much more ready to take up the language of ,david1 and say--8,enter not into judgment with thy servant1 ,o ,lord2 for in thy sight shall no man living be justified40 ,it appears1 from these quotations1 that ,maimonides did not learn his contempt for womankind from the ,mahometans1 but from the oral law and the prayers of the synagogue4 ,modern ,judaism disqualifies a woman from giving evidence1 shuts her out from the study of ,god's ,word1 excludes her from the number of his worshippers1 and even in its prayers to ,god pronounces her as nothing better than a heathen1 or a slave3 for in the preceding benedictions1 the man says first--8,blessed art thou1 ,o ,god1 c41 who hath not made me a heathen20 then1 8,blessed art thou1 c41 who hath not made me a slave20 and1 finally1 8,blessed art thou1 c4 who hath not made me a woman40 ,now we ask every ,jew and ,jewess1 into whose hands this book may fall1 whether a religion which teaches one-half of the human race to despise and degrade the other half1 can possibly come from ,god8 or whether it is not the invention of narrow-minded and vain-glorious men8 ,even reason itself would tell us that ,god can never teach us to despise the works of his own hands1 and still less to hold up the mother who bore us1 or the companion who has shared all our joys and sorrows1 to the scorn of a privileged class of human beings4 ,and yet this is what the oral law does1 and thereby shows that it does not proceed from ,him who inspired ,moses and the prophets4 ,the writings of the ,old ,testament furnish no warrant for female degradation4 ,they commence by telling us that the woman as well as the man was formed in the image of ,god1 and that though woman was first led into transgression1 yet that she should have the honour of giving birth to him who should bruise the serpent's head4 7,gen4 iii4 #ae47 ,they tell us farther1 that when ,god was pleased to give the commandments from ,sinai1 that he exacted of all children to honour the mother as well as the father--8,honour thy father and thy mother40 ,but how is it possible for any one to honour his mother who despises her as an inferior being1 does not look upon her as fit to give evidence in a court of law1 and even makes it a matter of public thanksgiving that he is not like her8 ,surely such an one is much more like him of whom it is said-- 8,a foolish man despiseth his mother40 7,prov4 xv4 #bj47 ,the oral law is1 in this respect1 altogether inconsistent with the law of ,god4 ,the former tells fathers to leave their daughters without any religious education1 and the latter supposes that they have been so well taught as to be able to teach their sons4 ,thus ,solomon says1 more than once1 8,my son1 keep thy father's commandment1 and forsake not the law of thy mother10 4 7,prov4 vi4 #bj47 ,but how is it possible for those ,jewish mothers1 in ,poland or ,africa for instance1 who cannot even read themselves1 to teach their sons8 or1 even suppose they could read1 how can a son believe in his mother's instruction1 when the oral law tells him that she is not qualified to give testimony8 ,but the ,bible does not teach us merely to have a respect for our own mother1 but shows as generally that ,god is no respecter of persons1 and that he bestows his gifts upon all4 ,it presents to our view many women1 as ,sarah1 ,rebecca1 ,miriam1 ,deborah1 and ,hannah1 as examples of piety1 and informs us that in the time of salvation1 he will pour out his ,spirit upon all flesh1 without any distinction of sex or nation4 8,and it shall come to pass afterward1 that ,i will pour out my spirit upon all flesh2 and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy40 7,joel iii4 #a4 ,in the ,english ,bible1 ii4 #bh47 ,yea1 as if to mock the rabbies and the oral law1 ,god adds1 that it shall be given even to the male and female slaves4 8,yea1 even upon the servants and handmaids1 in those days1 will ,i pour out my spirit40 ,the two classes of human beings whom1 next to the ,amharatzin1 the oral law treats with the most indignity1 are women and slaves3 but ,god's thoughts are not like the rabbies' thoughts1 and he1 therefore1 graciously stands forth as the vindicator of the oppressed1 and promises even to these classes the gift of prophecy4 ,here again1 then1 we see that 8as far as the east is from the west10 so different is ,god's law from the present religion of the ,jewish people4 ,the religion of the rabbies is a grinding tyranny1 oppressive to the ,gentiles1 to slaves1 yea1 and to all unlearned ,jews1 and that does not even spare the wives1 the mothers1 and the daughters of ,israel4 ,wherever the oral law can have its full sway1 as in ,mahometan countries1 the women are left totally destitute of learning and religion--they are not even taught to read4 ,in not one of those countries is a school for female children to be found4 ,it is only in ,christian lands that the daughters of ,israel get any education1 or ever attain to anything like that station which ,god destined them to fill4 ,wherever the light of ,christianity shines1 however feeble1 it ameliorates the condition of the female portion of the ,jewish nation1 and compels even the disciples of ,rabbinism to take a little more care of their souls and their intellects4 ,jewish females are therefore deeply indebted to the doctrines of ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,if he had not risen up against the oral law1 they would be universally classed with slaves1 idiots1 and ,amharatzin4 ,he has delivered them from this degradation4 ,let them then consider the religion of ,jesus1 and the religion which the rabbies have taught them1 and then let them decide which is most beneficial to their temporal and eternal welfare4 ,the religion that comes from ,god must be beneficial to all his rational creatures4 ,a religion that oppresses or disdains any one class1 and deprives them of religious instruction1 cannot come from him4 ,no4 ,,xlvii4 ,,polygamy4 ,great and striking is the difference of position which womankind occupies in ,europe and in the countries of the ,east4 ,in the latter they are men's slaves3 in the former his companions4 ,in the latter they are objects of contempt even to their own sons4 ,in the former they are the honoured instruments to impart the first elements of learning and religion4 ,here in ,europe they appear as co-heirs1 with man1 of reason1 of intellect1 of liberty and immortality2 but there they seem to be an inferior race of beings1 at the very most a better sort of domestic animal4 ,that the ,european state of things is more agreeable to ,god's intention in the creation of male and female is evident from the consideration1 that there one half of the human race is doomed to degradation and misery1 whilst here they enjoy a becoming respect1 and a much larger portion of happiness2 and still more from observing the effects of the two systems4 ,here the intellectual and moral powers of mankind have far advanced towards perfection1 but there the human race is still debased and barbarous4 ,now that1 which makes happy and improves1 must necessarily be more agreeable to ,god's purpose in creation1 than that which degrades and makes unhappy2 and this argument will also go far to prove that another striking feature of difference1 which distinguishes the ,west from the ,east1 is also more in accordance with the will of ,god2 we mean the fact that here men have only one wife1 whilst there they have many4 ,there can be no doubt that this characteristic of ,european life conduces much to the well-being and the peace of families1 as well as to the moral and intellectual improvement of individuals4 ,in these two great advantages and means of happiness the ,jewesses of ,europe participate4 ,they are not illiterate slaves like their sisters in the east1 neither do they divide their husbands' affections with many4 ,here the ,jews1 like the ,christians1 have only one wife4 ,it becomes1 therefore1 a most interesting subject of inquiry to know to what the ,european ,jewesses are indebted for this superiority of respect and happiness4 ,is it to their own religion1 or to the religion of ,christians1 that is1 is it to ,judaism or ,christianity8 ,we might answer at once1 that ,judaism has certainly not produced this salutary difference1 for then it would have produced the same effect in ,mahometan countries1 but we prefer referring to the oral law itself4 ,we have already shown that modern ,judaism degrades women to the level of slaves and ,amharatzin3 we shall now prove that the ,jewesses are not indebted to it for the abolition of polygamy4 ,when ,napoleon assembled the famous ,parisian ,sanhedrin1 he proposed this question to the ,jewish deputies1 8,is it lawful for ,jews to marry more than one wife80 ,to which they returned the following answer3--8,it is not lawful for ,jews to marry more than one wife3 in all ,european countries they conform to the general practice of marrying only one4 ,moses does not command expressly to take several2 but he does not forbid it4 ,he seems even to adopt that custom as generally prevailing1 since he settles the rights of inheritance between children of different wives4 ,although this practice still prevails in the ,east1 yet their ancient doctors have enjoined them to restrain from taking more than one wife1 except when the man is enabled by his fortune to maintain several4 ,the case has been different in the ,west2 the wish of adopting the customs of the inhabitants of this part of the world has induced the ,jews to renounce polygamy4 ,but as several individuals still indulged in that practice1 a synod was convened at ,worms in the eleventh century1 composed of one hundred rabbies1 with ,guerson 7,gershom7 at their head4 ,this assembly pronounced an anathema against every ,israelite who should1 in future1 take more than one wife4 ,although this prohibition was not to last for ever1 the influence of ,european manners has universally prevailed40 7,transactions of the ,sanhedrin1 p4 #aej47 ,a more evasive1 false1 and inconsistent answer has rarely been given to a plain straightforward question4 ,first they say decidedly1 that it is not lawful for ,jews to marry more than one wife3 then they spend a page in contradicting themselves1 and at last acknowledge that the abolition of polygamy was first owing to the anathema of a rabbi1 and that it is now to be attributed to the influence of ,european manners4 ,but what are ,european manners8 ,what religion do ,europeans profess8 ,plainly the religion of ,jesus of ,nazareth1 so that here the ,jewish deputies acknowledge that if ,jewish wives have not got three or four or more rivals shut up with them in the same house1 they owe this benefit to ,christianity4 ,but we must not rest satisfied with this answer of the ,parisian deputies2 we must ask the oral law itself1 whether it is lawful for ,jews to marry more than one wife1 and must hear the oral law's reply4 ,it answers thus3-- 1 8,a man may marry many wives1 even a hundred1 either at once1 or one after the other1 and his wife cannot prevent it1 provided that he is able to give to each suitable food1 clothing1 and marriage-duty40 7,iad ,hachasakah ,hilchoth ,ishuth41 c4 xiv4 #c47 ,this is rather different doctrine from that of the ,parisian ,sanhedrin4 ,here it is plain that the oral law allows a man to have more than one wife1 and does not stint him at all as to the number4 ,the ,arbah ,turim teaches precisely the same doctrine1 except that it advises a man not to marry more than four3-- 1 1 8,a man may marry many wives1 for ,rabba says it is lawful to do so1 if he can provide for them4 ,nevertheless1 the wise men have given good advice1 that a man should not many more than four wives40 7,even ,haezer1 #a47 ,so far then as ,judaism is concerned1 polygamy is lawful2 and a ,jew that would even restrict himself according to the advice of the rabbies1 might still have four wives4 ,it is not his religion that teaches him to be content with one3 and therefore1 we must1 farther1 inquire how it is that the ,jews1 who consider polygamy lawful1 do not indulge in it4 ,the ,parisian deputies have already informed us that it still prevails in the ,east1 and that it prevailed in ,europe until the eleventh century1 when ,r4 ,gershom anathematized it4 ,in the place just cited we find a similar statement3-- 1 1 1 8,in a place where the custom is to marry only one wife1 it is not permitted to marry more than one woman4 ,r4 ,gershom anathematized any one that should many a second1 whilst his wife was alive2 but this anathema does not extend to the case of the widow of a brother1 who has died without children1 nor to the case of a woman who is only betrothed4 ,this ordinance1 however1 does not obtain in all lands1 and the anathema was only to last until the end of the fifth thousand years40 ,hence it appears that before ,r4 ,gershom1 polygamy was lawful and practised by the ,jews in ,europe1 but that he forbade it except in particular cases2 and further1 that ,r4 ,gershom's prohibition was only temporary1 it was to have full force until the end of the fifth thousand years1 that is1 until the year #abdj of the ,christian era4 ,this period is how long past1 for the ,jews reckon this year #eeig1 and ,gershom's anathema has therefore lost its force2 consequently1 the only obstacle1 which their religion opposed to polygamy has been removed1 and1 so far as conscience is concerned1 every professor of ,judaism must feel himself at liberty to marry as many wives as he likes4 ,he knows that ,r4 ,gershom's anathema has expired1 and if he goes to the codes of ,jewish law1 he finds that it is left doubtful4 ,for instance1 the note on the passage just cited says-- 1 8,nevertheless1 in all these countries the ordinance and the custom remain in force1 and it is not lawful to marry two wives2 and he that transgresses and does so is to be compelled by anathema and excommunication to divorce one of them4 ,but some say that in the present time he that transgresses the anathema of ,r4 ,gershom is not to be compelled1 for the five thousand years have been completed long since2 but the custom is not according to this40 ,here then are two opinions4 ,the most strict of the two is1 that polygamy is now not lawful1 and that he who marries two wives must divorce one of them3 but even this cannot be very satisfactory to the woman whom he first married1 for it does not define which of the two is to be divorced4 ,it only requires that one of them should be divorced1 and leaves it to the man himself to divorce which he pleases4 ,the other opinion is1 that polygamy is now lawful1 and that he is not to be compelled to divorce either4 ,hence it appears that it is not ,judaism which protects the rights and the happiness of ,jewish women1 or the peace and comfort of ,jewish families4 ,the influence and the laws of ,christianity forbid polygamy4 ,to ,christianity1 then1 ,jewish females are indebted1 not only for the station which they hold in society1 but for the peace which they enjoy in their homes4 ,wherever ,christianity has no power1 there the ,jews may take as many wives as they please3 and if ever ,judaism should obtain supreme power1 ,jewesses must expect to be again degraded into the category of slaves and ,amharatzin1 and to have their domestic peace annihilated by the introduction of new wives and families4 ,it may be replied1 that this objection applies with equal force to the written law1 for that ,moses himself allows polygamy4 ,but to this we answer1 that ,moses only tolerated polygamy1 but that he shows clearly that it was not the purpose of ,god1 that men should have more wives than one4 ,he found an evil custom existing amongst a people debased by ,egyptian slavery1 and like a wise reformer1 he did not commence his improvements by destroying all that existed1 but endeavoured to restrain the evil1 to show that it was contrary to ,god's original institution1 and to point out the consequences4 ,he did not immediately pronounce it unlawful1 for that would have been attended with serious inconveniences1 but by the direction of ,god gave laws to protect the wives and children4 ,in the beginning of ,genesis--he showed that ,god's will was1 that a man should have only one wife1 for that he did not create several women1 but only one4 ,he gives the words of ,god1 saying1 8,it is not good that the man should be alone3 ,i will make him an help meet for him0 where 8help0 is in the singular number1 to show that man was not to have more than one help meet for him4 ,and again1 those words1 8,therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother1 and shall cleave unto his wife10 not unto his wives1 but to his wife2 where it is also to be observed1 that ,god is laying down a law1 not for ,adam only1 but for coming generations4 ,by exhibiting the original institution of marriage in ,paradise1 whilst man was yet innocent1 and stating the original law and purpose of ,god1 ,moses plainly showed1 that ,god's will was1 that a man should have only one wife4 ,he then goes on to show1 that the first who departed from this original institution was ,lamech1 one of the wicked descendants of wicked ,cain4 8,and ,lamech took unto him two wives10 7,gen4 iv4 #ai17 whom he held up as a warning1 recording of him only that he had two wives1 and that he was a murderer4 ,with this he contrasts the conduct of ,noah and his sons1 who had only one wife each4 ,in the history of the patriarchs he shows the evil consequences of polygamy4 ,he shows that it was not the will of ,abraham to take a second wife1 but that ,sarah in her eagerness to have children misled him1 and that discord and domestic trouble soon followed4 ,and by all the troubles which the sons of ,ishmael have since inflicted upon the children of ,isaac1 ,god has1 in his providence1 confirmed the moral to be drawn from the ,mosaic narrative4 ,moses then points out the happiness of ,isaac1 who had only one wife2 and the troubles of ,jacob1 who1 not by his own choice1 but by the wickedness of ,laban and the folly of ,laban's daughters1 had more than one2 and last of all1 ,moses gave in himself an example of the conduct which he wished ,israel to pursue by having only one wife himself4 ,a careful examination1 therefore1 of the law of ,moses will show that he only tolerated polygamy as an existing evil1 but that he intended to discourage it1 by exhibiting the original institution of marriage1 and the many evils that result from a departure from ,god's purpose4 ,when1 therefore1 we show that the oral law permits men to have more wives than one1 and that consequently it is accountable for all the evil thence resulting1 we cannot be charged with reproaching the law of ,moses4 ,the oral law says expressly1 that a man may marry many wives1 even a hundred4 ,the law of ,moses nowhere says any thing of the kind4 ,it only legislates in case that such a thing should happen4 ,the oral law plainly advises a man not to take more than four wives4 ,the law of ,moses holds up the evil of having more than one4 ,if men would carefully read the law of ,moses1 they would see that the original intention was1 that a man should have only one wife4 ,but if a man follow the oral law1 he will be encouraged to take as many as he can support4 ,it is evident1 therefore1 that if the ,jews in ,europe do not practise polygamy1 their conduct is not to be ascribed to the influence of ,judaism1 but of ,christianity4 ,it is1 further1 evident that this ,christian practice of having only one wife1 cannot be objected to as an unauthorized alteration of the law of ,moses4 ,if ,r4 ,gershom was allowed to forbid polygamy1 and the ,jews considered themselves bound to obey him1 they cannot reasonably object to the ,christian laws on the same subject4 ,christianity has only effected by its influence what ,r4 ,gershom endeavoured to accomplish by anathema4 ,the only difference is1 that ,christianity was first1 and that ,r4 ,gershom learnt the evil of polygamy from ,christians4 ,if it was lawful for a rabbi1 it was still more lawful for the ,messiah to restore the original constitution of marriage as established in ,paradise1 and to deliver ,jewish wives and families from all that confusion and discord which results from polygamy4 ,but it is particularly deserving of notice that ,r4 ,gershom1 by forbidding the ,jews to have more wives than one1 made a great and decided change in the oral law4 ,that which the oral law allows1 ,r4 ,gershom forbids4 ,we grant1 indeed1 that by thus changing the oral law1 he approximated to the mind and intention of ,moses3 but he altered the oral law1 and thereby shows us that he himself did not believe that the oral law was to last for ever1 or that it is of eternal obligation4 ,if he had considered it unchangeable1 he would not have dared to make the change2 but by making so important a change as this1 to forbid what it allows1 he plainly shows it as his opinion1 that where there is a grave reason1 the oral law may be changed or abolished2 and all the ,jews who acquiesce in his ordinance1 and think it is unlawful to marry more wives than one2 consent to the change4 ,but if it be lawful to change in one thing1 it must also be lawful to change in another1 so that the rabbinical ,jews have no reason whatever for reproaching their brethren who renounce the oral law totally4 ,such persons are only acting upon a principle practically acknowledged by all the ,jews of ,europe4 ,it may be said that ,r4 ,gershom's change was only temporary1 and that the present acquiescence of ,european ,jews is only a sort of homage to ,christian principles4 ,this is certainly true1 and this reply leads us to consider the dreary prospect presented to ,jewish females1 if ever modern ,judaism should obtain power4 ,the influence of ,christian principle would then cease1--polygamy would again be lawful1 and the matrons of ,israel1 who now appear as the participators in the family government and the guides of their households1 would again be degraded into one of a herd of female slaves4 ,they might have a hundred competitors and rivals in their husbands' affections1 and even if the husband should follow the advice of the rabbies1 and take only four wives1 they would at least have three4 ,now1 we ask every matron in ,israel whether she would wish such a change1 or whether she would prefer the present state of things1 where a man can have only one wife8 ,if she prefers the present state1 then she prefers the ,christian principle1 and acknowledges that ,christianity is better than ,judaism4 ,if she does not wish for the restoration of polygamy1 then she confesses that the doctrines of ,judaism are injurious1 and that she does not desire the triumph of her own religion4 ,then why should she profess a religion which she acknowledges to be prejudicial to her welfare--or why should she reject a religion which protects her peace and comfort8 ,there can be no question1 that ,christianity has prevented amongst the ,jews that practice of having many wives2 it has1 therefore1 been a blessing to ,jewish families for centuries2 why1 then1 should they despise or oppose a religion which has been1 and still is1 a blessing8 ,and we propose this question1 not only to ,jewish wives1 but to ,jewish husbands4 ,is it not a fact1 that ,god's original institution was that a man should have only one wife--does not ,moses show that the first polygamist was a descendant of wicked ,cain1 and1 that family discord and unhappiness is the consequence of having more wives than one8 ,does not reason1 and the state of ,mahometan countries1 show that where there are many wives1 woman is degraded1 and the education of children necessarily neglected8 ,is not the moral1 the intellectual1 and scientific progress of mankind greatly superior in ,christian countries1 where men have only one wife8 ,is not1 then1 the practice of having only one wife a blessing8 ,has it not been a blessing to ,jewish husbands1 wives1 and children8 ,are not1 then1 the ,jews deeply indebted to ,christianity for that measure of peace and moral improvement which they have derived from this practice8 ,and would not an adherence to their own oral law in the same degree have proved a disadvantage1 if not a curse8 ,how1 then1 can they oppose a religion which has been to them a blessing8--or how can they adhere to a religion which contains principles subversive of their domestic peace1 and destructive to the well-being1 and the moral and intellectual improvement of one-half the human race8 ,the rabbies say1 that the oral law is eternal in its obligation3 if so1 then polygamy is to be eternal in its continuance1 and then men are never to return to that state of perfection which they enjoyed in ,paradise4 ,who is there that does not see that the race of men was most happy when sin was unknown1 and most perfect in intellect when he could hold converse with the ,deity and dwell in the garden of ,god8 ,but if ,judaism be true1 men are never again to enjoy that state1 for then polygamy was unknown4 ,adam had only one wife2 and until sin entered into the world1 and ripened even into murder1 no man had two wives4 ,judaism is1 therefore1 opposed to the pure and perfect state of things that existed in ,paradise1 and favourable to that confusion introduced by the murderous ,lamech1 the son of murderous ,cain--and ,christianity resembles1 in its principles of marriage1 the happy state ordained by ,god in ,paradise4 ,here1 then1 we have another and a practical proof that the oral law is not of ,god4 ,its authors totally misunderstood the mind and purpose of ,moses1 the servant of ,god1 and misinterpreted his temporary toleration of an existing evil into a positive permission and sanction for continuing it4 ,we have also another proof of the divine origin of ,christianity4 ,no4 ,,xlviii4 ,,divorce4 ,when ,god delivered the commandments at ,sinai1 he placed those which related to himself first1 to teach us that our first duty is to love and serve him3 and immediately after these he gave the command 8,honour thy father and thy mother10 to show us that1 next to himself1 we are bound to reverence1 to love1 and to obey those to whom we owe our existence4 ,this order of things was not an arbitrary choice1 but founded in that natural constitution of creation which ,god ordained as most conducive to the intellectual and moral well-being as well as to the happiness of his creatures4 ,he does not command us to love and serve ,him1 and ,him only1 merely because ,he has the light on the one hand1 and it is our bounden duty on the other2 but because a conformity to his will is an approximation both to wisdom and happiness4 ,neither does he tell us to honour father and mother1 because we owe them all such reverence1 as from them we have derived our being1 and to them are indebted for all the care and affection with which they have tended and watched over our infancy2 but because ,he has himself constituted the relation of parent and child1 and ordained parental affection and filial duty as the means of promoting our welfare in time and in eternity4 ,any religion1 therefore1 whose tendency is to render obedience to that command impossible1 must not only be contrary to the will of ,god1 but to the happiness of man2 and this is one of the many reasons for which we think that ,judaism must be false4 ,the religion of the oral law has a direct tendency to diminish a son's respect for his mother4 ,we do not mean to say that in this or any other ,christian country ,jewish sons despise their mothers4 ,the co-existence of ,christianity necessarily counteracts the development of rabbinical principles4 ,we intend only to exhibit the natural and necessary consequences1 if there were no counteracting force4 ,the contempt which the oral law pours upon women in general1 and the encouragement which it gives to polygamy have necessarily the effect of lessening their respect both in the eyes of their husbands and their sons1 and this tendency is still more increased by the rabbinic doctrine of divorce1 which we now propose to consider4 ,the law of ,moses permits divorce under certain circumstances4 ,it says1 8,when a man hath taken a wife1 and married her1 and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes1 because he hath found some uncleanness1 1 in her2 then let him write her a bill of divorcement1 and give it in her hand1 and send her out of his house10 c4 7,deut4 xxiv4 #a47 ,but this permission1 founded on grave and important considerations1 the rabbies have perverted into an unlimited licence to divorce on the most trifling pretext4 1 1 8,the school of ,shamai says1 ,a man is not to divorce his wife unless he shall find some uncleanness in her1 for they interpret the verse according to its simple meaning1 if she find no favour in his eyes on account of his finding some uncleanness in her4 ,the school of ,hillel thinks1 that if a woman let the broth burn it is sufficient for they interpret the words1 #8a matter of uncleanness1' to mean1 ,either uncleanness1 or any other matter in which she has offended him4 ,but ,r4 ,akiva thinks1 that a man may divorce his wife1 if he only find another handsomer than she is1 for he interprets the verse thus1 #8,if she find no favour in his eyes1' where he explains favour to refer to the favour of beauty1 or if he find a matter of uncleanness4 ,but the legal decision is according to the school of ,hillel1 that is1 if a wife sin against her husband1 he may divorce her40 7,arbah ,turim1 ,hilchoth ,gittin41 #a47 ,this monstrous passage is in itself sufficient to shake the authority of the oral law1 for in the first place we find three grave authorities1 ,shamai1 ,hillel1 and ,akiva1 all differing as to the sense of a most important passage1 bearing upon a subject that most nearly affects the happiness and well-being of human society4 ,one of the gravest questions that can be propounded is1 ,when is a man justified in divorcing his wife8 ,if there be an oral law at all1 it ought certainly to answer this question clearly1 unequivocally1 and satisfactorily4 ,the existence of disputation shows that these three rabbies had no authoritative tradition on the subject1 but were merely giving their own private opinions3 and that therefore the assertion1 that an oral law exists1 is a mere fiction invented to impose upon the credulous1 but insufficient to beget faith in any man or woman that will make use of the reason given by ,god4 ,the old fable1 that ,god caused a voice to be heard from heaven1 saying1 when the rabbies differ1 8,that both speak the words of the living ,god10 will not do now4 ,every one can understand that ,god does not speak contradictions4 ,no one will believe that the profane sentiment of ,r4 ,akiva1 ,that a man may divorce his wife as soon as he finds another who pleases him better1 can proceed from the ,god of holiness and justice4 ,it is true that his opinion is not the law2 but the opinion of ,hillel1 which is the law1 is not a whit better4 ,it pronounces that if a woman only spoil the broth she may be divorced3 now this interpretation or the words of ,moses is plainly contrary to the grammatical sense3 is in ,regimen 77 and joined to by a munach1 and can therefore by no means be separated from it so as to signify 8,either uncleanness or some other matter40 ,the words of ,moses1 the points1 and the accents1 all decide that there is only one cause for which a man may put away his wife4 ,hillel and his successors have wilfully passed by the plain sense of the ,hebrew words1 in their eagerness to obtain a facility for putting away their wives4 ,they were not ignorant of the right sense1 for that was plainly asserted by ,shamai1 but were determined to get rid of it2 and such was the state of the ,jews at the time1 that they had influence enough to turn their false interpretation into law2 and such has been the state of the ,jews ever since1 that it continues law to this very hour4 ,a rabbinical ,jew may1 according to his religious tenets1 turn away his wife1 the mother of his children1 on a pretext that would hardly justify the dismissal of a servant4 ,he may rudely tear asunder the sacred ties of conjugal affection1 and separate between mother and children1 if the unhappy woman should only make a mistake in her cookery4 ,one of the worst charges brought against the slave-dealers was1 that they had no respect either for maternal or filial affection2 that they separated between mother and children4 ,the very same accusation can be brought against modern ,judaism1 which legitimatizes the very same disregard for the feelings of a mother4 ,can1 then1 such a religion1 which thus daringly snaps the ties of nature1 be from ,god8 ,is it possible that ,god should thus expose one half of his rational creatures to the caprice and the tyranny of those who ought to be their defenders and protectors from every insult and every harm8 ,if the same right were given to women1 though the laws would be most contrary to the divine institution of marriage1 it would at least have the appearance of justice2 but this is denied4 ,the oral law says1-- 1 1 8,the words1 #8,if she find no favour in his eyes1' teach1 that the husband does not divorce except voluntarily2 and if the woman be divorced against his will1 she is not divorced4 ,but the woman is divorced with or without her will40 7,jad ,hachazakah ,hilchoth1 ,gerushin1 c4 #a1 #b47 ,according to this doctrine the happiness of the wife and the children is absolutely vested in the power of the man2 and in any paroxysm of ill-humour1 he may make them both unhappy for life2 he may turn the mother out of her home1 drive her forth like a criminal from the bosom of her family1 and introduce a stranger4 ,who does not see that this is a power unfit to be trusted to the hands of any man or any people8 ,we do not mean to impute anything peculiar to the ,jews2 we believe that as to their natural propensities1 humours1 and caprices1 all men are much alike1 and that therefore none ought to have the power of thus lightly breaking up the domestic constitution4 ,it is no answer to this to say1 that in this country divorce is not so lightly practised4 ,thanks to the power of ,christian principle and the existence of ,christian laws1 it cannot be4 ,but every one1 who has had much opportunity of seeing rabbinical ,jews1 knows that divorce is practised amongst them with a facility and frequency that is astonishing4 ,but this is not the question2 we are not examining ,jewish manners1 but the modern ,jewish religion2 and if divorce had never been practised1 we should still pronounce of the oral law1 which inculcates such principles1 that it cannot be from ,god2 and of its authors that they were bad men1 or they would never have thus trifled with ,god's most holy institution4 ,the truth is1 that the rabbies were altogether ignorant of the nature of marriage as ,god established it4 ,they not only allow divorce on the most trifling pretext1 but they sanction the practice of marrying for a given length of time1 and1 when that time is expired1 of dissolving the marriage by divorce3-- 1 8,a man must not marry a woman with the intention of divorcing her2 but1 if he previously inform her that he is going to marry her for a season1 it is lawful40 7,hilchoth ,gittin in ,even ,haezer1 #a47 ,now how contrary is such doctrine to the express words of ,scripture4 8,this is bone of my bones1 and flesh of my flesh4 ,therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother1 and shall cleave unto his wife2 and they shall be one flesh40 7,gen4 ii4 #bc47 ,here ,adam1 in his state of innocence1 pronounces that the tie of marriage is more sacred and more binding1 than even that which exists between parent and child4 ,a man may1 and for his wife's sake shall1 forsake father and mother1 but should no more think of separating from his wife1 than from his own bones and flesh4 ,who would lightly think of parting with a limb1 or a portion of his body8 ,urgent1 indeed1 must be the necessity that will induce a man to permit the separation of a portion of himself1 and equally urgent should be the cause that should move a man to part with her who is bone of his bones1 and flesh of his flesh4 ,such is the ,mosaic doctrine of the marriage obligation2 but so little did the rabbies understand it1 that they permit a man to marry for a week1 a month1 or a year2 and when that season is expired1 to tear asunder the sacred ties1 and that without any cause whatever4 ,but the evident evil that must result from the rabbinic doctrine of divorce is still more apparent from the first sentence of the passage last quoted--8,a man must not marry a woman with the intention of divorcing her40 ,these words show the direct tendency of the doctrine4 ,when power is given to a man to turn out his wife when he likes1 a temptation is at once held out to the evil-disposed to marry with the express intention of divorcing4 ,the rabbies1 therefore1 find it necessary to forbid it2 but is it likely that this prohibition will have much force in the eyes of a man who is wicked enough to form the intention8 ,and suppose a wicked man does form the intention1 and execute it1 what remedy had the poor injured woman8 ,thus the oral law leaves the daughters of ,israel completely at the mercy of the unprincipled1 and places them beyond this possibility of obtaining justice4 ,but the cruelty and total want of feeling which the oral law displays and teaches1 with regard to women1 appears still more plainly from the following extract3-- 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 8,if a man's wife should become deaf and dumb1 he gives her a bill of divorce1 and she is divorced4 ,but if she become insane1 he is not to send her forth until she is recovered3 and this thing is an ordinance of the wise men1 that she should not become a prey to the immodest1 because she is not able to take care of herself4 ,the husband therefore1 leaves her where she is1 and marries another1 and gives her meat and drink out of her own property4 ,but he is not to be compelled to give her food and raiment1 and duty of marriage1 for it is not in the power of a sane person to dwell in one house with the insane4 ,neither is he obligated to have her cured1 nor to ransom her4 ,but if he should divorce her1 then she is divorced1 and is to be put out of his house3 and he is not obligated to return and take any trouble about her40 7,hilchoth ,gerushin1 x4 #bc47 ,principles more contrary to ,god's ,word1 and to the common feelings of humanity1 were never inculcated under the name of religion4 ,we have been astonished at the cruelty with which the oral law treats ,gentiles--we have been horrified at the coolness with which it speaks of splitting open an ,amhaaretz--but here it surpasses itself1 and out-herods ,herod4 ,a man accustomed to judge of his duty by the words of ,moses and the prophets1 or even to follow toe dictates of unsophisticated nature1 would conclude that1 as he is at all times bound to love and cherish his wife1 the obligation is doubly imperative in case of sickness1 but especially so when that sorest calamity with which human frailty is visited1 insanity1 attacks the partner of his life4 ,then it is that the man1 who has one spark of the fear of ,god or of the love of man1 will show all his tenderness1 watch over the sufferer with all care and anxiety1 and if necessary1 devote all his worldly goods to minister to her recovery4 ,no1 says the oral law1 when the wife of your bosom most requires your attention1 then marry another3 give her neither food nor raiment1 and1 if you please1 cast her out of your house1 and leave her to her fate4 ,the most charitable conclusion would be1 to suppose that the men who uttered such sentiments under the mask of religion1 were themselves insane4 ,but what are we to think of ,israel1 that for eighteen hundred years they have been unable to detect so manifest an imposture8 ,and what are we to think of ,israel at present1 that they sit still and suffer their children to be deluded1 by being taught that this most atrocious system of inhumanity1 is that pure and holy religion which the ,god of ,israel revealed to ,moses8 ,let not any ,israelite mistake us4 ,we do not mean to charge such wickedness upon them4 ,the ,providence of ,god has in a measure delivered them from such an odious yoke4 ,the influence of ,christianity has successfully counteracted the full development of these anti-human principles4 ,we only mean to direct their attention to the nature of that religion to which they have adhered so long2 and to induce them to consider what would be the state of the world1 if ,jesus of ,nazareth had not arisen to protest against such gross corruptions1 and to assert the truth4 ,just suppose that the traditions had triumphed4 ,the universal law would then be1 that men might divorce their wives when they please1 and in the time of their calamity cast them forth into the streets4 ,all the bonds of natural affection would be rent asunder4 ,conjugal affection would cease1 filial duty be unknown--no son would honour his mother1 for how could a son honour the unhappy being whom his religion pronounces unworthy either of succour or compassion in the time of her utmost need8 ,if such principles had attained dominion1 mankind would have been turned into a race of fiends1 and this earth have become a hell4 ,what1 then1 has stopped all this misery8 ,christianity1 and ,christianity alone4 ,it teaches very different principles4 ,when a ,christian man is married1 the vow which he is required to make is this--8,wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife1 to live together after ,god's ordinance in the holy estate of matrimony8 ,wilt thou love her1 comfort her1 honour1 and keep her in sickness and in health2 and1 forsaking all other1 keep thee only unto her1 so long as ye both shall live80 ,this is the doctrine of the ,new ,testament4 ,the ,pharisees asked the ,lord ,jesus1 8,is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause8 ,and he answered and said unto them1 ,have ye not read1 that ,he which made them at the beginning made them male and female1 and said1 ,for this cause shall a man leave father and mother1 and shall cleave to his wife2 and they twain shall be one flesh8 ,wherefore they are no more twain1 but one flesh4 ,what therefore ,god hath joined together1 let not man put asunder40 7,matt4 xix4 #c-g47 ,in like manner1 ,paul teaches1 8,so ought men to love their wives as their own bodies4 ,he that loveth his wife loveth himself40 7,ephes4 v4 #bh47 ,and ,peter teaches in the same spirit1 8,likewise1 ye husbands1 dwell with them according to knowledge1 giving honour unto the wife1 as unto the weaker vessel1 and as being heirs together of the grace of life2 that your prayers be not hindered40 7#a ,peter iii4 #g47 ,let any unprejudiced1 yea1 or any prejudiced1 man1 if he have only the use of his senses1 compare these two doctrines1 and say which is most agreeable to the will and character of ,god1 as revealed in the ,old ,testament--and1 which is most calculated to promote the happiness of the human race4 ,the combination of mercy and justice forms a striking feature in the revealed character of ,god1 but is there either justice or mercy in the laws which we have just considered8 ,the happiness of the human race depends1 in a more than ordinary measure1 upon the right organization of the family relations3 but how can there be any such thing as domestic order or peace1 so long as the mother is looked upon as belonging to an inferior caste1 whom it is permitted at any moment1 even in the most afflictive of all visitations1 to outlaw1 and drive forth from the family circle8 ,the uncontrolled dominion of the oral law would practically annihilate all the sympathies and consolations of the domestic constitution4 ,the husband could not love the wife whom his religion teaches to despise1 and forbids to pity4 ,the wife could not love the husband1 whom she must suspect not only of being destitute of affection1 but devoid of pity2 and from whom she could only expect divorce and expulsion in the hour of calamity4 ,the son would learn to despise his mother1 whom his religion marks out as a fit object for contempt1 and a suitable victim for the exercise of cruelty4 ,the mother1 cast out by her own partner1 would not even have the consolation of being pitied by her own children4 ,a false religion would have taught them that this unnatural conduct was only obedience to the ,divine will4 ,the principles of ,christianity1 on the contrary1 produce and protect all that domestic happiness which distinguishes ,christian countries from the rest of the world2 and in which ,jews participate4 ,the influence of ,christianity has prevented that misery of which we have given but a faint outline4 ,can1 then1 the ,jews deny that ,christianity has been1 and is1 to them a blessing8 or that it is1 in its principles and effects1 more agreeable to the character of ,god1 and more productive of human happiness1 and therefore more excellent and more true than modern ,judaism4 ,no4 ,,xlix4 ,,rabbinic ,,laws ,,concerning ,,meat4 ,conscientious adherence to the dictates of true religion is one of the noblest traits that can adorn the human character1 and this trait has appeared in its most vivid light in not a few of the ,israelite nation4 ,elijah the prophet1 for instance1 is a bright example of religious constancy4 ,at a time when all ,israel had forsaken the true ,god1 and zealously professed a false religion1 neither the allurements of self-interest1 nor the power of universal example1 nor the natural desire of self-preservation1 could draw him aside from the paths of truth and righteousness4 ,daniel and his three friends in ,babylon exhibit the same unwavering firmness in the assertion of truth4 ,the ,royal dainties could not prevail upon them to partake of food offered to idols4 ,the fiery furnace could not terrify ,hananiah1 ,mishael1 and ,azariah1 to commit idolatry2 the lions' den possessed no terrors that could move ,daniel to omit the worship of his ,god4 ,but as constancy for the truth ennobles and adorns1 in the very same degree an obstinate perseverance in error diminishes from man's moral or intellectual value4 ,it shows either that his moral perception is so blunted as to be unable to discern between truth and error1 or his moral taste so perverted as not to care for the difference--or that there is some intellectual deficiency which renders the moral powers inoperative4 ,it leads to the suspicion that there is something wrong either with the head or the heart4 ,there is1 however1 a class of persons1 who persevere in error1 not because the head is weak1 or the heart sick1 but because they have never fairly beheld the light of truth4 ,they have grown up in a mist of error1 and circumstances have prevented them from emerging into a purer atmosphere4 ,to this class1 we would hope1 the professors of modern ,judaism belong4 ,that they have been for centuries in error is certain4 ,many incontestable proofs of this have been already advanced2 ,the rabbinic laws concerning 1 or the slaughtering of animals1 will add another link to the chain of evidence4 ,the ,rabbinists have an idea that wherever they may be wrong1 in this doctrine they are infallibly in the right2 and yet1 if the force of education did not afford some aid1 it would be impossible to imagine how they can be deceived by a doctrine so manifestly false1 and so entirely devoid of ,scriptural foundation4 ,in the first place1 the slaughtering of beasts is1 like eating1 of every-day and universal concernment--a matter that affects the poor and unlearned as much as the studious2 and yet the rabbinic rules are so many and so intricate that either a man must be learned himself1 or employ a man of competent learning1 to perform this business2 or1 he must1 in spite of himself1 turn ,pythagorean and renounce the use of animal food4 ,the oral law gives the following outline of what is to be understood by the word or slaughtering3-- 1 1 1 1 8,it is absolutely necessary to explain the killing 7or slaughtering mentioned in the law71 and to know1 in what part of the beast one slaughters--what is the measure of the slaughtering--with what implement one slaughters--when--where--and how one slaughters--what things they are which invalidate the act of slaughtering--and who is permitted to slaughter4 ,concerning all these things1 ,he has commanded us in the law where it is said1 #8,then thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock1 which the ,lord hath given thee1 as ,i have commanded thee1 and thou shalt eat in thy gates whatsoever thy soul lusteth after6' 7,deut4 xii4 #ba470 7,jad ,hachazakah1 ,hilchoth ,shechitah1 c4 i4 #d47 ,here we have at once a list of eight particulars1 which must first be known1 but then most of these again require a long and learned explanation2 for instance the first is thus defined3-- 1 1 1 8,on what part of the animal is the slaughtering to be effected8 ,on the wind-pipe1 from the edge of the uvula downwards as far as the top or the extremity of the lungs1 as these parts are situated when the beast stretches out its neck to feed3 this is the place of the slaughtering in the wind-pipe2 and all the part outside which answers to this place1 is called the neck4 ,if the beast forces itself and stretches out its neck much1 or if the slaughterer has forced the sinews1 and drawn them upwards1 and he slaughters at the right part of the neck1 but afterwards it is found that the wind-pipe or the sophagus is not cut at the right place1 then it is a doubtful case of carrion40 7,ibid4 #g47 ,in like manner1 the measure of the slaughtering is accurately defined1 and must be as accurately attended to1 or else the slaughtering must be considered unlawful1 and then it becomes unlawful for the ,rabbinists to eat it4 ,but the most care is required in examining the knife1 which may be of any material that will cut1 on condition that there be no gap in it3-- 8,but if there be anything like a furrow in the edge of the implement wherewith the slaughtering is effected1 even though the furrow be the least possible1 the slaughtering is unlawful40 ,the slaughterer is therefore required to examine the knife before and after the act2 for if a gap be found in it after the slaughtering1 it is doubtful whether the beast is not be considered carrion3-- 8,therefore he that has to slaughter many beasts or many fowls1 must examine the knife after each2 for if he does not1 but examines at the end1 and the knife is found to have a gap1 then all are to be considered as doubtful carrion1 even the first40 7,ibid4 #bd47 ,from these few particulars1 it appears that great care1 and not a little study and practice1 are required in order to slaughter an animal for food according to the oral law1 and that it is very easy1 by mistake or want of knowledge1 to make the meat unfit for rabbinic eating3 but then1 besides all this1 there are the five circumstances which invalidate the slaughtering altogether3-- 8,there are five things which invalidate the slaughtering3 and the most important thing respecting the constitutions of slaughtering is1 to attend to each one of them1 and these are they--#ast1 ,if the person makes a stop of a certain length before the act is completed4 #b;d1 ,if the throat be cut at a single blow1 as with a sword4 #c;d1 ,if the knife enters too deep1 and is hidden4 #dth1 ,when the knife slips up or down from the right place4 #eth1 ,when the wind-pipe or sophagus is torn and comes out1 before the act is completed40 7,ibid4 c4 iii47 ,these five essentials of rabbinic slaughtering lead again to endless questions and definitions2 so that1 putting all together1 it is much to be doubted whether a beast ever was1 or ever will be1 rightly slaughtered according to the oral law4 ,and yet these things1 of which there is not the slightest mention in the ,mosaic law1 are tied like a heavy burden about the necks of the poor and ignorant1 and are most oppressive to their bodies and their souls4 ,the rich may not1 perhaps1 feel the oppression1 but the poor sigh and groan under the load2 and no man considers their sorrow1 or stretches out a hand to help them4 ,in the first place1 the intricacy of the act always makes rabbinic meat a great deal dearer than other meat1 so that the poor man and his family1 who can at any time1 or under any circumstances1 afford to buy but little food1 are compelled by the oral law to do with still less1 and in many cases to do without it altogether4 ,let any one visit the haunts of the poor ,jews in this city1 or enter their abodes1 and he will find many a wretched family pining away for want of proper food2 and yet it is too dear to procure a sufficiency2 and if any benevolent ,christian should wish to assist them1 offer them some of his own1 or give them a ticket to some of those institutions which distribute meat to the poor1 the starving family would not dare to accept it1 even if their conscience allowed them1 or if they did1 would inevitably draw down upon themselves a storm of persecution1 and be treated as if they had committed the greatest crimes3 yea1 if the oral law had power1 the poor starving creatures1 that had partaken of ,christian bounty1 would be flogged for satisfying the wants of nature3-- 1 8,if a ,gentile slaughters1 even though he does it in the presence of an ,israelite1 with a proper knife1 his slaughtering is carrion2 and he that eats of it is to be flogged according to the written law1 for it is said1 #8,and one call thee1 and thou eat of his sacrifice4' 7,exod4 xxxiv4 #ae470 ,yea1 the oral law goes so far as to extend this rule even to the case of a ,gentile who is not an idolater3-- 8,a very strong fence has been made round this matter1 so that the slaughtering even of a ,gentile1 who is not on idolater1 is carrion40 7,ibid41 c4 iv4 #aa1 #ab47 ,it is hardly necessary to say1 that the above quotation from the oral law is now-a-days altogether out of place4 ,moses was not speaking of ,christians nor of the inhabitants of these countries1 but of the nations of ,canaan4 ,he had been declaring the words of the ,lord1 8,behold1 ,i drive out before thee the ,amorite1 and the ,canaanite1 and the ,hittite1 and the ,perizzite1 and the ,jebusite40 ,and then adds1 8,take heed to thyself1 lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land1 and they go a whoring after their gods1 and do sacrifice unto their gods1 and one call thee1 and thou eat of his sacrifice40 7,exod4 xxxiv4 #aa-ae47 ,so then1 according to the oral law1 because ,moses forbade the ,israelites to partake of the idolatrous sacrifices of the ,hivites and the ,jebusites1 a poor famished creature here in ,london is not to touch ,christian meat1 nor to partake of ,christian bounty4 ,a more cruel or oppressive law could hardly have been devised4 ,it is all very well for the rich1 but it is very little short of murder to the poor4 ,it binds their consciences with fetters of iron1 so that even when relief is offered1 many turn from good and wholesome food sent to them by a kind ,providence2 and if a spark of light has visited the mind of some victim of poverty1 and he thinks it lawful to bring home the ,christian bounty to save the lives of his starving children1 fear prevents him4 ,perhaps his wife is still enveloped in all the darkness of superstition1 and would spurn the proffered relief as an unclean thing1 or perhaps his children might innocently betray him1 and draw down all the weight of rabbinic indignation4 ,a grosser insult has rarely been offered to the ,majesty of heaven1 than to call good and proper food1 the work of his hands1 carrion4 ,a mistake in the slaughtering1 an ignorance of the rabbinic art1 a ,gentile hand1 is to be sufficient to turn the bounty of ,almighty ,god into an unclean thing1 and to deprive the poor of their daily food4 ,how can the ,jews expect ,god's blessing so long as this state of things continues--how can they be surprised if poverty and want1 and wretchedness and scorn1 tread close upon their heels1 when they themselves spurn ,god's bounty from them with disdain8 ,as nations deal with ,god and his word1 so he deals with them1 1 measure for measure2 and therefore1 so long as the oral law teaches them to scorn his bounty1 and to deprive the poor of their food--so long as the cries of the poor ascend and enter into the ears of the ,lord of ,hosts1 so long must they expect to feel the rod of his indignation4 ,the times of ignorance and superstition ,god winked at2 but those times have passed away4 ,good or bad1 there is a stir in the world--there is a shaking of all old opinions1 true and false2 and from its effects the ,jews have not escaped4 ,there are many who1 for themselves and their families1 have renounced ,rabbinism--who eat ,gentile food1 and know that in doing so they commit no sin4 ,these are the persons who are most guilty in looking upon the misery of their poor brethren without pity or concern and without an effort to deliver them4 ,the rabbinic zealot who would persecute his brother for eating meat not slaughtered according to rabbinic precept is in comparison innocent4 ,he conscientiously thinks that he is doing right2 but for the man1 who himself openly transgresses the oral law1 and yet sees the faces of his brethren ground by that system1 without a sentiment of pity1 there is no excuse4 ,if he had the common feelings of humanity1 he would rise up1 fearless of all consequences1 and cry out with all his might against those principles which have been and are the curse of his nation4 ,he would stand forth as the advocate and defender of the poor--yea1 and he would have ,god's blessing4 ,but so long as this class of anti-rabbinic ,jews remain silent1 whether from fear or from interest1 or from indifference1 let them not boast of their superior light4 ,let them not look with self-complacency on the poor victims of superstition4 ,they are themselves less respectable and more guilty4 ,they are conniving at what they know to be falsehood4 ,they are with their eyes open consenting to oppression and starvation4 ,they are1 by their silence1 helping to strengthen and confirm a system of anti-social intolerance1 which has been the source of all the calamities which their nation has endured for eighteen centuries4 ,what can be more pernicious than to teach the ignorant that the food which their neighbours eat is carrion1 so unfit for the nourishment of a ,rabbinist that he ought to die1 and suffer his family to die of want1 rather than eat it8 ,is it likely to produce kindly feeling on either side1 considering that the mass of mankind is not actuated by the dictates of reason or the precepts of the ,bible8 ,on the one side it is likely to produce proud contempt1 and on the other a spirit of retaliation4 ,every ,jew that wishes well to his nation1 and knows that these rabbinic principles are false1 is bound to protest against them4 ,he ought not to be a poor selfish thing1 insensible to the wants and the sufferings of others1 but should do what in him lies1 to assert what he knows to be the truth4 ,and is it necessary to remind such of the misery which these rabbinic principles are still working in every part of the world8 ,here in ,london the poor are suffering4 ,in the various towns of ,england many ,jews are suffering4 ,in some places a single ,jewish family is found1 generally poor1 and the father ignorant of the rabbinic art of slaughtering3 such persons are compelled to abstain altogether from animal food1 or to do violence to their conscience4 ,the poor ,jews who go out to the colonies to seek employment are in the same case1 and are precluded from taking such situations as require them to partake of the food of their employers4 ,even if they can buy an animal1 they are not allowed to kill it for themselves3-- 1 8,if an ,israelite does not know the five things which invalidate the act of slaughtering1 as we have explained1 and slaughters by himself1 it is unlawful to eat of his slaughtering1 both for himself and others2 for this case is much the same as that of doubtful carrion1 and he that eats of it a quantity equal to an olive1 is to be flogged with the flogging of rebellion40 7,ibid41 c4 iv47 ,such is the mercy of the oral law1 and such its justice4 ,it punishes the eating of what ,god has allowed1 with the same severity that it would visit a great crime4 ,it makes no provision for those numerous cases of distress which we have mentioned4 ,whether one of its disciples has or has not food1 it never considers4 ,without reflection and without mercy it sentences every one1 who eats meat not rabbinically slaughtered1 to be flogged4 ,but1 besides the cruelty1 what is the effect upon the minds of its votaries8 ,it teaches them that to transgress this mere human observance is a sin of the deepest die1 more dreadful far than many which ,god has forgiven4 ,a ,rabbinist would be more grieved to hear that his son had transgressed the law of slaughtering1 than to find that he had been guilty of falsehood4 ,its tendency is directly to draw off the mind from the weightier matters of the law1 judgment1 justice1 and mercy1 and to flatter the ill-informed that they are good ,jews1 if only they abstain from meat not slaughtered according to rabbinic art4 ,let not any ,jew imagine that we wish him lightly to transgress the law of ,moses1 or to eat of food which the law of ,god has forbidden4 ,we now speak of that which ,moses has allowed4 ,if a ,jew would see meat offered to idols1 or be invited to partake of an idolatrous feast1 let him abstain--let him refuse1 and protest as strongly as he will and can against the sinfulness of such conduct4 ,but where does ,moses forbid the poor to partake of meat slaughtered by a ,gentile worshipper of the true ,god1 or by an ,israelite who has not learned the rabbinic art8 ,certainly not in that passage to which the oral law refers4 ,moses gives a general permission to every ,israelite1 without exception1 to kill and eat4 8,notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates1 whatsoever thy soul lusteth after1 according to the blessing of the ,lord thy ,god which he hath given thee40 7,deut4 xii4 #ae47 ,he makes no mention of any mysteries1 connected with the art of slaughtering1 the ignorance of which would disqualify4 ,why then should a ,jew be prevented from doing what ,moses has allowed--why should he be flogged with the flogging of rebellion1 or avow that that mode and measure of punishment is impracticable--why should he be persecuted for satisfying the cravings of nature1 and endeavouring to supply the wants of his family8 ,there is not room now to show fully how groundless the rabbinic commands are2 but the one fact of their cruelty and oppression of the poor is sufficient to show that they are not from ,god4 ,is it possible that any man in his senses can believe that ,god would sentence a poor famishing creature to be flogged without mercy for doing what the letter of the law allows him to do8 or1 that the ,all-wise ,being1 who foresees and foreknows all things1 would give a system of laws respecting food1 which must expose a large portion of his chosen people to want and starvation8 ,the worshippers of some cruel heathen deity might possibly be led to believe such things1 but the disciples or ,moses and the ,prophets know that ,god is a ,god of mercy4 ,let1 then1 every one who has got the sacred books contrast their doctrines with those of the rabbies4 ,but1 above all1 let those ,israelites1 who reject the rabbinic laws concerning the slaughtering of meat1 show that they have not done it from levity nor indifference1 but upon principle4 ,let them explain to their brethren the reasons and the motives by which they are actuated1 and let them protest1 by word and deed1 against such cruelty1 oppression1 and intolerance4 ,no4 ,l4 ,,the ,,birth ,,of ,,messiah4 ,this season of the year naturally draws away our thoughts from the subject last under consideration1 and reminds us of a remarkable difference between ,jews and ,christians4 ,the latter are now about to commemorate the birth of the ,messiah4#cf ,in two days more the voice of praise and thanksgiving will ascend to the ,creator and ,preserver of men from every part of the world4 ,on the frozen shores of ,labrador1 and the glowing plains of ,hindostan--in the isles of the sea1 and on the continents of the old and new worlds1 millions of ,christians will lift up their hands and voices to thank the ,god of heaven for his unspeakable gift1 and this shall be the burden of their song1 8,unto us a child is born1 unto us a son is given3 and the government shall be upon his shoulder3 and his name shall be called ,wonderful1 ,counsellor1 the mighty ,god1 the everlasting ,father1 the ,prince of ,peace40 7,isaiah ix4 #f47 ,but amongst the followers of the oral law not a sound of sympathy will be heard4 ,not a single heart will beat with joy1 not a tongue offer up the tribute of praise4 ,here is a great and sinking difference1 that should naturally lead both ,jew and ,christian to inquire1 ,who is in the right3 ,those who believe that ,messiah is born1 and joy in the remembrance of his nativity2 or1 those who refuse to join in the general rejoicing1 and deny that the ,redeemer has appeared8 ,the question is whether there is reason to believe that the ,messiah was born eighteen hundred years ago8 and there are several ways in which it can be satisfactorily answered4 ,an appeal may be made to the predictions contained in the ,old ,testament1 or to the evidence for the truth of the ,christian ,scriptures--or1 it may be shown that the ,jewish rabbies have plainly confessed that the time for the birth and appearance of the ,messiah is long since past2 and this is the mode which we shall adopt at present4 ,the ,jews now deny that ,messiah is come1 and consequently believe that ,christians are mistaken as to the time of his appearing4 ,if they had always said so--if they had always assigned a time for the coming of ,messiah different from that in which ,christians think the ,messiah was born1 their present assertion would have at least the merit of consistency1 and the ,jews of the present day might urge that their present belief has been inherited from their fathers1 and that ,christians have adopted a notion unknown to the nation at large4 ,but1 if it should appear that the ancient ,jews expected the coming of ,messiah at the very time1 when1 as ,christians say1 he did actually come1 then the ancient ,jews testify that ,christians are in the right1 and that modern ,jews are in the wrong1 and this is really the state of the case4 ,in the first place1 the ,talmud contains a general declaration that the time is long since past3-- 8,rav says1 ,the appointed times are long since past0 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #ig1 col4 #b71 where it is to be noted that the word is taken from ,daniel1 and literally signifies 8,end10 as it is said3-- 8,how long shall it be to the end of these wonders2 and again3-- 8,but go thou thy way till the end be1 for thou shalt rest1 and stand in thy lot at the end of the days40 7,daniel xii4 #f-ac47 ,rav was therefore of opinion that the period appointed by ,daniel the prophet was past4 ,but is it possible to believe that the ,god of truth would suffer the time1 which he had appointed1 to pass away without accomplishing what he had promised8 ,when the time which ,god had fixed for the deliverance from ,egypt had arrived1 not a single day was lost4 8,it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years1 even the self-same day1 it came to pass1 that all the hosts of the ,lord went out from the land of ,egypt40 7,exod4 xii4 #da47 ,when the period fixed for the return from ,babylon was come1 we read1 8,in the first year of ,cyrus1 ,king of ,persia 7that the word of the ,lord by the mouth of ,jeremiah might be accomplished71 the ,lord stirred up the spirit of ,cyrus king of ,persia1 that he made a proclamation through all his kingdom40 7#b ,chron4 xxxvi4 #bb47 ,and can we think that the ,lord ,god1 who so graciously fulfilled his word on these occasions should break it with reference to the coming of the ,messiah8 ,rav is either right or wrong4 ,if he be right1 then the time fixed by ,god is long since past1 and as ,god cannot break his word1 the ,messiah must have come long since4 ,but if1 to get out of a difficulty1 the ,rabbinists say1 that ,rav was wrong1 then we have another proof that no reliance is to be placed on the doctors of the oral law2 indeed we have a proof that the ,rabbinists themselves do not believe it1 except when they like2 and that therefore they are not thoroughly in earnest about their religion4 ,but1 secondly1 the ancient ,jews not only believed that the time for the coming of the ,messiah was past3 they also fixed the exact period3-- 1 1 8,tradition of the school of ,elijah4 ,the world is to stand six thousand years4 ,two thousand1 confusion4 ,two thousand1 the law4 ,two thousand1 the days of ,messiah40 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #ig1 col4 #a47 ,upon which ,rashi remarks-- 8,after the two thousand years of the law1 according to the decree4 ,messiah ought to have come1 and the wicked kingdom should been destined1 and ,israel's state of servitude should have been ended40 ,here1 then1 it is expressly stated1 that ,messiah ought to have come at the end of the fourth thousand years1 that is1 according to the ,jewish reckoning1 fifteen hundred and ninety-seven years ago2 or1 according to the ,christian reckoning1 about eighteen hundred and thirty-six years ago--that is1 at the very time when ,jesus of ,nazareth did appear4 ,we do not quote this tradition because we believe that it is really a tradition of the school of ,elijah1 but to show what was the opinion of the more ancient ,jews1 and this it certainly does1 if the general expectation of the ,jews at that time had not been that ,messiah was to appear at the end of the four thousand years1 this tradition1 whether genuine or forged1 could never have obtained currency nor belief4 ,if it be a genuine tradition from ,elijah1 then the ,messiah is certainly come4 ,but if it be fictitious1 then it shows the general belief of the ,jews at the time1 and in every case proves that the modern ,jews do not hold the doctrines of their forefathers1 but have got a new doctrine of their own4 ,and it further shows1 that ,christians do not hold any new or peculiar opinion about the time of ,messiah's coming1 but that they believe1 as the ancient ,jews believed1 that the end of the fourth thousand years is the right time of ,messiah's coming4 ,the only answer that the ,jews have1 is1 that the promise of ,messiah's coming was conditional upon their repentance1 but that evasion has been long since refuted in the ,talmud as contrary to ,scripture3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,r4 ,eliezer said1 ,if ,israel do repentance they will be redeemed1 but1 if not1 they will not be redeemed4 ,r4 ,joshua replied1 ,if they do not repent they will not be redeemed3 but ,god will raise up to them a king whose decrees shall be as dreadful as ,haman1 and then ,israel will repent1 and thus he will bring them back to what is good4 ,another tradition4 ,r4 ,eliezer said1 ,if ,israel do repentance1 they shall be redeemed1 for it is said1 #8,turn1 ,o backsliding children2 ,i will heal your backsliding4' ,r4 ,joshua replied1 ,but was it not said long since1 #8,ye have sold yourselves for nought2 and ye shall be redeemed without money1' 7,isaiah lii4 #c47 ,where the words #8sold for nought' mean1 for idolatry2 and the words #8redeemed without money1' signify1 not for money and good works4 ,r4 ,eliezer then said1 to ,r4 ,joshua1 ,but has it not been said long since1 #8,return unto me1 and ,i will return unto you4' 7,mal4 iii4 #g47 ,r4 ,joshua replied1 ,but has it not been said long since1 #8,i am married unto you1 and ,i will take you one of a city1 and two of a family1 and ,i will bring you to ,zion4' 7,jer4 iii4 #ad47 ,r4 ,eliezer said1 ,but has it not been written long since1 #8,in returning and rest ye shall be saved4' 7,isaiah xxx4 #ae47 ,r4 ,joshua replied to ,r4 ,eliezer1 ,but has it not been said long since1 #8,thus saith the ,lord1 the ,redeemer of ,israel1 and his ,holy ,one1 to him whom man despiseth1 to him whom the nation abhorreth1 to a servant of rulers1 kings shall see and arise1 princes also shall worship4' 7,isaiah xlix4 #g47 ,r4 ,eliezer said to him again1 ,but has it not been said long since1 #8,if thou wilt return1 ,o ,israel1 return unto me4' 7,jer4 iv4 #a47 ,to which ,r4 ,joshua replied1 ,but has it not been written long since1 #8,i heard the man clothed in linen1 which was upon the waters of the river1 when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven1 and swore by ,him that liveth for ever1 that it shall be for a time and times and half a time2 and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people1 all these things shall be finished4' ,whereupon ,r4 ,eliezer was silent40 ,here then1 on the showing of the ,talmud itself1 the opinion that the coming of the ,messiah is dependent upon ,israel's repentance1 is false2 and consequently it is true1 that ,messiah was to come unconditionally at the time appointed2 and therefore1 as the time is long since past1 the ,messiah must have come4 ,but the ancient rabbies do not leave us to reason upon their words2 on the contrary1 they tell us expressly that ,messiah was born about the time that the temple was destroyed4 ,in the ,jerusalem ,talmud1 ,r4 ,judan tells us a story of a ,jew who actually went and saw him3-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8,it happened once to a certain ,jew1 who was standing ploughing1 that his cow lowed before him4 ,a certain ,arab was passing and heard its voice2 he said1 ,o ,jew1 ,o ,jew6 unyoke thine ox1 and loose thy plough-share1 for the temple has been laid waste4 ,it lowed a second time1 and he said1 ,o ,jew1 ,o ,jew6 yoke thine oxen1 and bind on thy plough-shares1 for ,king ,messiah is born4 ,the ,jew said1 ,what is his name8 ,menachem4 ,he asked further1 ,what is the name of his father8 ,the other replied1 ,hezekiah4 ,he asked again1 ,whence is he8 ,the other said from the ,royal residence of ,bethlehem of ,judah40 7,berachoth1 fol4 #e1 col4 #a47 ,the story1 then1 goes on to tell us how he went and saw the child1 but when he called the second time1 the mother told him that the winds had carried the child away4 ,we are quite willing to grant that this story is a fable4 ,we do not quote it because we give it the slightest degree of credit1 but simply to show that the more ancient ,jews were so fully persuaded that the right time of ,messiah's advent was past1 that they readily believed also that he was actually born4 ,the ,babylonian ,talmud1 also1 evidently takes for granted that ,messiah is born1 as appears from the following legend3-- 1 1 8,r4 ,joshua1 the son of ,levi1 found ,elijah standing at the door of the cave of ,r4 ,simeon ben ,jochai1 and said to him1 ,shall ,i arrive at the world to come8 ,he replied1 ,if this ,lord will4 ,r4 ,joshua1 the son of ,levi1 said1 ,i see two1 but ,i hear the voice of three4 ,he also asked1 ,when will ,messiah come8 ,elijah replied1 ,go1 and ask himself4 ,r4 ,joshua then said1 ,where does he sit8 ,at the gate of ,rome4 ,and how is he to be known8 ,he is sitting amongst the poor and sick1 and they open their wounds and bind them up again all at once3 but he opens only one1 and then he opens another1 for he thinks1 perhaps ,i may be wanted1 and then ,i must not be delayed4 ,r4 ,joshua went to him and said1 ,peace be upon thee1 my master and my ,lord4 ,he replied1 ,peace be upon thee1 son of ,levi4 ,the rabbi then asked him1 ,when will my ,lord come8 ,he replied1 ,to-day 7alluding to the words of the ,psalm1 ,to-day1 if ye will hear his voice740 7,sanhedrin1 fol4 #ih1 col4 #a47 ,this is evidently a fiction1 and a proof how little those doctors regarded truth2 but it shows that he who invented it1 and those who received it1 all equally believed that ,messiah was born1 and ready waiting to come forth for the redemption of ,israel4 ,it does1 indeed1 confirm the common idea1 that ,messiah's advent depends upon the repentance of ,israel1 for it makes the ,messiah say that he would come this very day1 if ,israel would only hear his voice4 ,but if the ,messiah may any day1 when they repent1 come and save ,israel1 then it is plain that he must have been born long since4 ,the testimony of the ancient ,jews1 then1 goes to establish these points--,first1 ,that the time for ,messiah's advent has been long past2 ,secondly1 ,that the end of the fourth thousand years was the time when he ought to have come3 and1 ,thirdly1 ,that at that time he did really come2 for about that time1 they say1 he was born in ,bethlehem of ,judah4 ,fourth1 ,that he was taken into ,paradise1 as ,rashi explains the gate of ,rome to mean the gate of ,paradise opposite ,rome2 and1 ,fifthly1 ,that he is waiting to return to this earth for the redemption of his people4 ,now who is there that does not see at once1 that this agrees in the main with the ,christian doctrine8 ,we believe that1 at the end of the fourth thousand years1 the ,messiah was born1 and at this season of the year we rejoice at the remembrance of the ,saviour's birth4 ,the ,jews refuse to join with us1 but who has the greatest show of right8 ,not now to speak of the prophecies1 and of the historical evidence which we have1 we have the testimony even of our opponents to show that we are in the right4 ,the most ancient rabbinical writings unanimously confess1 that the time is past1 and that the ,messiah has been long since born1 and thus testify the correctness of our faith respecting the time of ,messiah's advent4 ,christians1 however1 go on consistently and believe further1 that ,god did not break his word1 but performed his promise1 and therefore we rejoice4 ,the ,jews do not believe1 because they are so engrossed with the temporal deliverance of the nation1 that they cannot see that another and a greater redemption was necessary4 ,we do not1 by any means1 wish to deny that ,israel is to be restored to the land of promise1 and to inherit all the blessings promised in the prophets4 ,on the contrary1 we fully believe that the ,messiah1 who visited this earth1 for a short season1 will return and re-establish the ,theocracy which was once the glory of ,israel1 and that1 in a much more glorious form than ,israel ever saw under any of their kings4 ,we heartily wish ,israel the enjoyment of every blessing promised2 but we cannot help remembering that ,messiah has another and more important office than that of restoring the kingdom to ,israel1 and that is the redemption of the human race4 ,the highest pitch of national glory and earthly prosperity would be as nothing1 and less than nothing unless the children of men were delivered from the effects of ,adam's sin1 and made partakers of a good hope of everlasting life4 ,even the gathering of ,israel from all the ends of the earth would appear but a very insignificant business1 if it did not stand in immediate connexion with the eternal welfare of all nations4 ,many of the sons of men have appeared as conquerors and heroes1 and have raised their country to a high degree of glory1 and conferred upon them much temporal prosperity2 but if ,messiah was to be nothing more1 we confess we should not think him worth the having4 ,we think of the ,messiah as the ,being1 in whom all the families of the earth shall be blessed1 as the restorer indeed of ,israel1 but also ,god's salvation unto the end of the earth4 ,this is the doctrine which ,christianity teaches1 and which is confirmed by the law and the prophets2 and therefore we rejoice that this great ,deliverer has been born--that ,he came at first in great humility to bruise the serpent's head1 and to lay down his life a ransom for many4 ,we remember that this blessed news1 these glad tidings of great joy1 were brought to us by ,jews2 and1 therefore1 feeling our deep obligations1 we desire to show our gratitude by inviting ,israel to come and partake in our joy4 ,we feel assured that our joy is no illusion4 ,even the rabbies themselves bear witness that the ,messiah ought to have been born1 and was born at the very time in which we believe the ,messiah to have been born4 ,but if he was born who was he8 ,what other person can make any claim to the ,messiahship1 but ,he whom we acknowledge8 ,is it reasonable to believe1 as the rabbies do1 that ,god actually sent the ,great ,deliverer down into this wretched world1 and then took him away again1 without permitting him to accomplish his work8 ,no2 if ever he visited this earth--and that he did visit it1 both the ancient ,jews and ,christians assert--he could not have left it again without bestowing upon its inhabitants a remedy for their woes4 ,the ancient rabbies and the ,christians both agree as to the time of ,messiah's birth1 and the fact of his birth in ,bethlehem4 ,indeed the whole nation practically showed their agreement with ,christians1 as to the time of ,messiah's advent1 by readily following every military adventurer1 who laid claim to the character of ,redeemer4 ,even before the destruction of the temple1 multitudes had suffered by their credulity2 but immediately after the desolation1 the people and the rabbies with one accord followed ,bar ,chochba1 and thereby showed the reality of their belief1 that that was about the time when ,messiah ought to appear4 ,judaism1 therefore1 teaches this doctrine--that ,god promised the ,messiah1 that ,god fixed a time1 that that time is past1 and yet that ,god did not keep his promise4 ,christianity1 on the contrary1 acknowledges the promise1 recognises the time1 believes that ,messiah was born1 but believes further that ,god fulfilled his word--that ,messiah was not carried away into ,paradise1 until he had accomplished the work that was to be done at his first advent4 ,then1 indeed1 we acknowledge that ,he ascended into heaven1 and sitteth at ,god's right hand1 from whence he will come again for the final redemption of his people1 and the establishment of the reign of righteousness4 ,the only real difference between us is1 as to the ,,veracity of ,god4 ,we believe that ,god did not1 and could not1 break his word4 ,modern ,judaism teaches that ,god broke his promise4 ,it is for rational beings to decide which doctrine is most agreeable to the ,divine character4 ,for our own parts1 we will rejoice in ,god's unchangeableness1 and say1 in the remembrance1 that 8,his truth endureth for ever40 ,footnote #cf3 ,this number was originally published ,december #bc1 #ahcf4 ,no4 ,,li4 ,,slaughtering ,,of ,,meat1 ,,continued4 ,according to the confessions of the rabbies themselves1 the time for the advent of ,messiah is long since past1 what is there then that prevents the ,jews from believing in him1 who came at the appointed time8 ,the grand objection is1 that the nation is still in captivity2 they say that ,messiah ought to have given them liberty4 ,the answer to this objection is1 that ,messiah was willing1 and is willing to this hour1 to give them liberty1 but that they will not have it4 ,the very first condition of national liberty and independence is moral and intellectual emancipation4 ,no nation was ever yet enslaved until the hearts and intellects of the people had first become the slaves of corruption or superstition--and no nation that hugs to its heart the chains of moral slavery1 can ever be made free1 nor could it retain its liberty if it got it4 ,when ,messiah came1 therefore1 as he found the ,jewish nation already under the ,roman yoke1 the very first step was to endeavour to emancipate their hearts and minds1 and to deliver them from that moral bondage1 of which their national degradation was only a consequence4 ,this first step ,messiah immediately took--he protested against the superstitions of the oral law1 and pointed them to the perfect liberty of ,god's written ,word4 ,but the nation chose to retain the cause of their misfortunes1 and to reject the overtures of deliverance4 ,if therefore they are still in a state of national dependence1 they must not cast the blame on ,god1 and say that ,he suffered the time to pass away without fulfilling his promise2 nor upon the ,messiah1 when they themselves refused to receive that without which no national liberty can possibly exist4 ,they chose to give themselves1 body and soul1 as bond-slaves to the oral law1 there was1 therefore1 no possibility of national redemption4 ,it would require an act of omnipotent coercion1 such as ,god does not employ1 to make a nation free against its will4 ,but perhaps the ,jews of the present day will deny that they are in a state of moral and intellectual slavery4 ,we refer them1 in reply1 to the numerous proofs already given in these papers1 and especially the laws of or slaughtering1 upon which we have a few words to add4 ,where in all the world can a more wretched slave be found1 than the man1 who himself1 together with his family1 is ready to perish of hunger1 and yet dare not partake of wholesome food1 offered by the providence of ,god1 because his rabbinical task-masters say1 ,no8 ,but now take another instance3-- 1 1 8,if a slaughterer1 who has not had his slaughtering knife examined before a wise man a rabbi1 slaughters by himself1 his knife must be examined4 ,if it be found in good order and examined1 he is to be excommunicated1 because he may depend upon himself another time1 when it has a gap in it and yet slaughter therewith4 ,but1 if it be found to have a gap1 he is to be deposed from his office1 and excommunicated1 and proclamation is to be made1 that all the meat which he has slaughtered is carrion40 7,jad ,hachazakah1 ,hilchoth ,sh'chitah1 c4 i4 #bf47 ,here we have the same slavery and the same cruel oppression4 ,in the first place we see the intention to make the ,jews entirely dependent upon the rabbies4 ,the ,jews are not to eat meat unless it be slaughtered as the rabbies direct1 and the slaughterer himself is not even to do that1 which he knows to be right according to the oral law1 without the express sanction of the rabbies4 ,all are to be in bondage1 not merely to the oral law1 but to the rabbi for the time being4 ,they are to have no mind and no judgment of their own4 ,in the simplest concerns of life they are to be entirely dependent upon the will and judgment of another4 ,in the second place1 we see the determination to maintain this tyranny by the severest punishments4 ,the man who has slaughtered without showing his knife to the rabbi1 even though they have no fault to find with him1 is to be excommunicated--but if a rabbinic flaw in the knife should be detected1 then not only the man himself is to suffer1 but those who employed him1 and also the ,israelites themselves to be deprived of food4 ,all that he has slaughtered is to be declared unfit for use4 ,who can deny that those who think their consciences bound by such laws are in miserable bondage8 ,who1 that has his senses and ,god's ,word to guide them1 can believe that a small gap in a knife is sufficient to make meat unfit for food8 ,who ever saw a knife1 or even the finest razor that ever was manufactured1 without a series of such imperfections8 ,let a rabbi1 who has just pronounced1 concerning a knife1 that it has no gap in it1 apply a microscope1 and he will soon find out that a knife without gaps never existed4 ,he will be convinced that the oral law requires what is impossible1 and therefore cannot possibly be from ,god4 ,who then can deny that those who are bound by it1 are the slaves of superstition8 ,there never was1 and never will be in the world1 such a thing as a knife without the least possible gap1 and consequently there never was1 and never will be1 any meat fit for the food of a ,rabbinist4 ,the ,jews must therefore either give up the use of meat entirely1 or they must give up the oral law4 ,if the oral law were uniformly severe1 and everywhere required that its adherents should obtain the best possible evidence that their meat was properly slaughtered3 or in case they could not obtain this evidence1 that they should entirely abstain from meat1 the consistency of the doctrine would in some measure justify1 or at least excuse the credulity of the ,jews4 ,but this is not the case1 its authors felt the inconvenience of their own doctrine1 and therefore relaxed whenever it suited themselves4 ,for instance1 they say3-- 1 1 1 8,if we were to see an ,israelite at a distance who had slaughtered a beast1 and he was to go his way1 and we were ignorant of the fact whether he understood the art or not1 in that case the meat is lawful4 ,and in like manner1 if a man should say to his messenger1 ,go and slaughter for me1 and should find the beast slaughtered1 but it should not be certain whether his messenger1 or another person1 had slaughtered it1 this also is lawful1 for the majority of persons concerned in slaughtering are skilful40 7,ibid41 c4 iv4 #g47 ,this relaxation shows how exceedingly inconvenient the doctrine was found1 and how unwilling the doctors were to bear inconvenience themselves4 ,no doubt cases often occurred in real life similar to those supposed4 ,an ,israelite travelling might come to a town in which lived a small congregation of ,jews1 and might wish to have some dinner1 and would of course wish to have it of lawful meat4 ,the only satisfactory way of obtaining it would be to go to the person who had slaughtered it1 and examine him as to his competency1 but he might be absent1 if therefore he should be scrupulous1 he would have to go without his dinner2 and the same thing would happen to a rich man1 who might send a messenger to a neighbouring town to have a beast killed for him4 ,the messenger might send back the meat by some one else1 and thus the owner would not have satisfactory evidence1 that the rabbinic laws had been observed4 ,here again the man who was rich enough to do this1 might have to go without his dinner1 or to wait an inconvenient time4 ,the oral law has therefore provided in this case that the meat is lawful for use without any further scruples4 ,but this decision shows of how little real importance all these precepts about slaughtering are4 ,if it be a sin to eat meat not properly killed1 then it is also a sin to eat meat1 when there is no satisfactory evidence of this fact4 ,whenever a man doubts about the right or wrong of any particular action1 he is certainly wrong if he does it4 ,but if it be certain that he may either do it or leave it undone without guilt1 then that action cannot be sinful4 ,and as the rabbies here affirm1 that men may lawfully eat meat1 concerning which they have no satisfactory evidence that it has been lawfully slaughtered1 it follows that the rabbinic art cannot be of much value4 ,why then should a poor man be starved if he does not eat1 or flogged if he does eat1 meat slaughtered by a ,gentile1 when1 if he had money to send a beast to be killed1 he might eat what was sent back1 even though he had no proof that the laws were kept8 ,indeed how are the poor and unlearned ever to know1 that they eat lawful meat8 ,if they were even to stand by1 and see the operation performed1 still1 as being ignorant of the rabbinic laws1 they could not understand1 and must therefore take the matter entirely upon trust3 and thus the mass of the nation1 the unlearned and the women1 are made the blind slaves of laws which they neither understand nor know2 or rather of those who expound those laws1 for how can it be said that a man transgresses that of which he does not know the right or wrong8 ,if the rabbies were all unanimous in their statement of what is and is not lawful1 the unanimity might in some degree excuse the ,jews for submitting to a yoke so grievous1 and holding it that round the necks of their brethren4 ,they might urge the uniformity of the tradition as a proof of its genuineness4 ,but this cannot be pretended in the present case4 ,to this very hour the rabbies themselves are not agreed as to what is1 or what is not the oral law4 ,we have just seen that if a man send a messenger to have a beast slaughtered1 and afterwards find it slaughtered1 that he may eat of it without asking any more questions4 ,this is the general principle1 but as soon as it comes to be applied in detail the rabbies differ4 ,the ,baal ,turim thus states the difference3-- 8,rambam has written expressly1 ,in case that it should be found in the house2 but1 if he find it in the street1 or on the dunghill in the house1 it is forbidden4 ,the ,baal ,haittur has given the same judgment3 but my lord my father of blessed memory says1 the meat is lawful1 even if it be found on the dunghill in the house1 and has not pronounced it unlawful1 except when found on the dunghill in the street2 and ,rashba is of the same opinion40 7,joreh ,deah41 #a47 ,here1 then1 we have the most learned of the rabbies1 disputing as to what is the law2 the one party pronouncing that to be unlawful which the other party declares lawful4 ,what1 then1 are the unlearned to do in this case8 ,or how can it be said that there is an oral law which gives the true meaning of the written law8 ,or1 if there be an oral law1 what use is it1 when it is itself a subject of dispute8 ,every one who has looked into the oral law knows that this difference of opinion is by no means a rare case2 and that it cannot be said that the difference of opinion is in matters of minor importance4 ,let us1 for example1 consider the case of an ,israelite who is accustomed to eat unlawful meat1 and does so to vex ,israel--is it lawful to eat the meat which he has killed8 1 8,rashba has written that it is not lawful to give him a beast intentionally to slaughter1 even if an ,israelite should stand by4 ,but if he has slaughtered the beast1 it may be declared lawful by means of examining the knife1 either at the beginning or at the end2 and my lord my father of blessed memory has written that in the case of such a person the law is the same as in that of a ,gentile40 7,ibid4 #b47 ,now the difference here is very great and very important4 ,the one opinion says1 that1 under certain circumstances1 such meat is lawful4 ,the other1 that it is unlawful as that killed by a ,gentile--that is1 what the one allows1 the other pronounces to be so unlawful as to deserve the flogging of rebellion1 as we saw in ,no4 #di4 ,here1 then1 is a case involving severe corporal punishment1 and yet the rabbies are not agreed as to which is the law4 ,how1 then1 can men of sense and reflection give themselves up to a system1 the doctors of which cannot agree upon a question so simple as this1 ,what sort of food is lawful1 and what is unlawful8 and who1 nevertheless1 require unlimited obedience under the heaviest penalties temporal and eternal8 ,the oral law does not suffer a wise man to be contradicted1 and declares that all their sayings are 8the words of the living ,god20 and yet here they contradict one another so widely1 that if a man follow the one1 he will be sentenced to a flogging by the other--and if from fear of the flogging he should agree with the latter1 he will then be contradicting the former1 and thereby incur the sentence of excommunication1 and even run a risk of losing his soul4 ,but in every case he must give up his judgment and his reason1 and submit to be led by those1 who are still disputing about the right road3 yea1 and if he would obey the oral law1 must confess that they are both in the right4 ,if this be not moral and intellectual slavery of the worst kind1 we have yet to learn the meaning of these words4 ,it will not be a pertinent reply to say that ,christians also differ in opinion on important points4 ,we confess that they do1 and will continue to do so1 as long as they continue to be fallible men3 but then these persons do not profess to have an oral law given by ,god in order to preserve them from a wrong interpretation4 ,there is one ,christian ,church that has followed the example of the rabbies in this particular1 and has therefore fallen into many of their absurdities4 ,difference of opinion amongst those who make no such pretensions is no argument against the truth of the original records1 whence both professedly draw their religion4 ,two men may differ as to the sense of a verse in the law of ,moses1 and yet we know that the verse itself contains the truth4 ,but when each of these persons tells us that his interpretation is an inspired tradition1 and that both1 though contradicting each other1 are equally true and correct1 then it is evident that they say not only what is false1 but what is absurd1 and that they are labouring under a delusion4 ,if it be a mere speculative delusion it is to be deplored--but if it be a practical delusion1 involving the happiness and welfare of thousands1 it must be combated and exposed--and this is precisely the case with the oral law4 ,the particular part of it which we have now been considering seriously affects the temporal comfort of many thousands of the poor in every part of the world4 ,the general principles enslave the minds of the whole nation1 and thus prevent the state of happiness and glory which the prophets have promised4 ,the ,jewish nation is in a state of dispersion1 and in some parts of the world victims of a cruel oppression1 simply because they are the willing slaves of superstition4 ,until an intellectual and moral change is effected1 they never can appear as 8the peculiar people1 the kingdom of priests1 the holy nation40 ,high and holy is their destiny1 and great is the providential mercy of ,god in still preserving them1 when they refuse obstinately to fulfil it4 ,but neither their destiny nor ,god's forbearance can be of any avail1 until they reassert the glorious liberty of the children of ,god4 ,the chains of ,rabbinism must be broken1 and the mild yoke of ,messiah taken upon their shoulders1 before national independence and liberty can return4 ,how could a nation exist1 whose moral and intellectual energies are all crampt by the endless subtleties of the rabbies8 ,how could a people maintain national liberty whilst they are such perfect slaves to superstition as to believe that traditions1 which are the curse of the poor1 and many of which flatly contradict others1 all proceed from the ,god of mercy and truth8 ,the temple must first be cleansed of all defilement before the glory of ,god can enter4 ,it is therefore a matter of the first and highest importance1 to every ,jew who wishes well to his nation1 to examine that system1 whose constant companion for so many centuries has been misery2 and if they are convinced of its falsehood1 then to use every exertion to deliver their brethren1 from that which is mischievous as well as false4 ,we might urge its tendency to produce and perpetuate an unfriendly separation between the ,jews and their neighbours3 not that we are ignorant of ,god's declaration1 8,lo1 the people shall dwell alone1 and shall not be reckoned among the nations40 7,numb1 xxiii4 #i47 ,we know it and believe it1 and are therefore fully convinced1 that all the wit and power of man will never be able to effect what some so ardently desire1 an amalgamation with the nations where ,israel is dispersed4 ,we have no desire to contravene the declared will of ,god1 and to degrade ,israel from their position as a holy nation to the rank of an inconsiderable religious sect4 ,but still we might urge against the oral law1 that it goes beyond ,god's intention by producing an unfriendly separation and an estrangement between man and man1 which is injurious to the welfare of both ,jew and ,gentile2 we leave this1 however1 to the consideration of those ,israelites who feel1 or profess to feel1 a love and affection for all men2 and content ourselves at present with the indubitable fact1 that the laws concerning slaughtering are most oppressive to the poor and enslaving to the minds of all4 ,it is not merely the bodily grievance of starvation to which we now allude1 though that is wicked and vexatious to the last degree1 and should therefore not be tolerated for a moment by the humane and the merciful4 ,there is something that is worse than any bodily suffering1 and that is1 to be tempted to do violence to conscience by professing what we do not believe1 or by congealing our real sentiments4 ,and yet in many a ,jewish congregation this is frequently the case4 ,it pleases ,god to give to the poor the power of reasoning as well as to the rich1 and thus some of this class are occasionally led to see the absurdity of the oral law1 and to detest those inventions which doom them and their families to starvation1 but yet they would not dare either to avow or to act upon their conviction4 ,to eat any ether than rabbinical food would at once cut them off from the bounty of the synagogue1 and from the sympathy of its worshippers4 ,to express their convictions would be sufficient to have them numbered with the profane and ungodly1 and therefore they conceal their real sentiments1 and pretend to be what they are not1 that they may not deprive their families of the little assistance which an apparent conformity to rabbinic usages may procure4 ,here then is another and more unequivocal badge of slavery4 ,the oral law deprives the poor entirely of liberty of conscience4 ,he not only must not eat1 he must not think1 at least he must not express a thought1 no1 nor even a doubt1 about that system which is the cause of his misery4 ,it is true1 that those who profess or suppress religious sentiments merely to serve their temporal interests1 are either very weak or very guilty4 ,but we must make some allowance for the infirmity of human nature1 and especially in the case of a poor man1 who has no bread for his children1 and whose mind has been debased from his youth by such bondage4 ,it is to the system that we are to impute these debasing effects4 ,it not only torments the body1 but degrades the mind2 and1 therefore1 every ,israelite who loves and respects liberty of conscience1 should endeavour to procure it for his brethren4 ,according to the law of the land they have it4 ,they are free to worship and serve ,god as they think most agreeable to his will2 but the oral law steps in between1 and deprives them of the benefit4 ,the ,jewish poor dare not serve ,god according to their conscience1 nor even express the convictions of their heart4 ,all the legislators in ,christendom could not set them free4 ,the duty as well as the possibility of delivering them from this bondage rests with their brethren4 ,but they1 alas6 whatever the motive1 decline the glorious task4 ,no4 ,,lii4 ,,laws ,,concerning ,,meat ,,with ,,milk4 ,it is recorded of the ,cutheans and those other nations whom the ,king of ,assyria placed as colonists at ,samaria1 that they endeavoured to combine the service of the true ,god with the worship of idols4 8,so these nations feared the ,lord1 and served their craven images1 both their children and their children's children3 as did their fathers1 so do they unto this day40 7#b ,kings xvii4 #da47 ,every one can see that this conduct was as foolish as it was wicked4 ,it was wicked to dishonour the true ,god by associating him with them that were no gods2 and it was foolish to imagine that ,god could be pleased with a partial homage and a divided heart4 ,total idolatry would have been more reasonable and less offensive to the ,divine ,being1 for he1 whom we acknowledge as ,god1 must necessarily have the whole of our fear1 our love1 and our obedience4 ,and yet there is perhaps a way of serving ,god more unreasonable still1 and that is by giving to sinful and fallible men the honour that is due to ,god alone4 ,the ,cutheans falsely thought that ,god was one amongst many2 and if they worshipped the many1 it was under the impression that they were really gods4 ,but suppose a nation to acknowledge the one true ,god1 and then to fix upon a certain number of men to be honoured and served with the same degree of reverence and obedience2 none can doubt that this nation would be far more irrational than that of the ,cutheans1 inasmuch as to pay ,divine honours to a number of our fellow-men is more extravagant still than to worship a plurality of imaginary deities4 ,some may think that such a degree of absurdity is impossible1 but fact shows that it is not only possible1 but that it has actually occurred4 ,when men exalt the inventions of their teachers to a level with the known and acknowledged laws of ,god1 and make obedience to these inventions an essential part of their religion1 they confer upon men the highest degree of honour and of service that can be rendered to ,god4 ,the unreserved submission of the heart and conscience to the will of ,god is the highest act of worship1 and when it is given to the will of men1 in that degree men are made gods4 ,whether these remarks apply to those who make the 1 i4e41 8,the constitutions concerning meat in milk0 a part of their religion1 it is for the adherents of the oral law to inquire4 ,the general principle of these constitutions is thus expressed-- 1 1 8,it is unlawful to boil meat in milk--according to the law1 it is also unlawful to eat it2 it is likewise unlawful to make any profit by it1 and it is to be buried4 ,its ashes are also unlawful1 like the ashes of other things that are buried4 ,whosoever boils together a quantity of these two things1 equal to an olive1 is to be flogged1 for it is said1 #8,thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mothers milk4' 7,exod4 xxiii4 #ai47 ,in like manner1 he that eats a quantity of the flesh and the milk1 which have been boiled together1 amounting in value to an olive1 is to be flogged1 even though be did not boil them40 7,hilchoth ,maakhaloth ,asuroth1 c4 ix4 i47 ,here the oral law determines generally1 that it is unlawful to boil meat in milk1 or to make any use of meat so boiled1 and sentences the transgressor to a severe and degrading corporal punishment1 and yet this determination is altogether an invention of men1 for which there is not the slightest authority in the ,word of ,god4 ,the prohibition of ,moses is confined to one single case1 which is exactly defined3 8,thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk10 but there the prohibition ends1 for the specification of one particular shows that that alone is intended1 and necessarily excludes all others4 ,to give some colour to the unwarranted extension1 it is asserted that 8,kid includes the young of kine1 of sheep1 and of goats1 so that to particularize1 the word goat is added as #8a kid of the goats4'0 ,and so ,rashi also affirms in his commentary4 ,aben ,ezra1 however1 has saved us the trouble of giving a refutation of our own1 for he says-- 1 8,this is not so1 for nothing is called kid except the young of the goats2 and in ,arabic the word has the same signification1 and is never applied to any other species4 ,but there is a difference between kid and kid of the goats1 for the former is larger1 and it is necessary for the latter still to be with the goats2 and the same thing is true of 1 which is used in the same way4 ,it is by tradition that the wise men received1 that ,israel should not eat meat in milk40 7,comment4 in ,exod4 xxiii4 #ai47 ,thus ,aben ,ezra1 himself a most learned rabbi1 confesses that the words of the written law restrict the prohibition to one particular case1 and that the rest is mere matter of tradition4 ,of course if it could be proved that this tradition came from ,god through ,moses1 it would be equivalent to the written law1 but there is no attempt to prove anything of the kind4 ,the authors of the oral law calculated throughout upon the blind credulity of their followers1 and therefore here1 as elsewhere1 there is an entire absence of proof4 ,indeed1 the tradition itself bears the plain mark of forgery4 ,how can any one possibly believe that1 if ,god meant to forbid meat and milk entirely1 he should first express himself incorrectly1 and then leave the correction of the error to uncertain tradition8 ,if the command had only been once noticed1 it would have been hard to believe such a thing2 but when we remember that this command is thrice repeated1 in ,exod4 xxiii4 #ai1 xxxiv4 #bf1 and ,deut4 xiv4 #ba1 it is plainly incredible4 ,thrice is the command written1 and thrice it is restricted to one particular case1 and yet the rabbies have dared to make unauthorized additions of their own1 and their followers to this day exalt them to a level with the laws of ,god4 ,it cannot be replied that the rabbies would not commit such wickedness as this1 for every one who knows anything of the oral law1 knows that a great proportion of it consists merely of the words of the ,scribes1 acknowledged as such1 and distinguished by that name from the supposed traditions from ,sinai4 ,thus in the constitutions before us1 it is plainly confessed that the written law allows the flesh of wild animals and of fowl in milk1 and yet the rabbies forbid it3-- 1 8,and thus the flesh of a wild animal or of fowl1 whether in the milk of a wild or tame animal1 is not forbidden as food by the written law1 and therefore it is lawful to boil it1 and to profit by it4 ,but according to the words of the scribes1 it is unlawful to eat it1 lest the people should go farther1 and be led into a transgression of the written law1 and eat the flesh of a clean beast in the milk of a clean beast3 for the letter of the written law refers only to a kid in its mother's milk in the strictest sense2 therefore the wise men have forbidden all meat in milk40 ,in this there is no equivocation1 but a simple confession that the rabbies have taken upon themselves to forbid what ,god has allowed2 and have1 without ceremony or scruple1 made great additions to his law4 ,it matters little what the motive was1 the conduct itself is in the highest degree presumptuous4 ,the pretence1 that these additions were made only for the purpose of keeping the people far removed from sin1 will not serve as a ground of justification4 ,if ,god had desired such precautionary measures1 as being either necessary or beneficial1 he would have prescribed them himself4 ,if he did not prescribe them1 and the rabbies themselves confess that he did not1 but that they are the words of the scribes1 then they can be neither necessary nor beneficial1 unless we can believe what it would be blasphemy to assert1 that is1 that ,god's law was imperfect until it was mended by the scribes4 ,it is truly astonishing that men professing respect for the law of ,moses should treat it with such indignity1 and still more so that those who appear so anxious to avoid transgression1 should themselves systematically transgress that plain command4 8,ye shall not add unto the word which ,i command you40 7,deut4 iv4 #b47 ,but the most extraordinary thing of all is1 that the modern ,jews should pride themselves on the purity of their faith1 and think that they only of all the nations serve the true ,god and him only1 when they are in truth serving the authors of the oral law1 and dividing their religious obedience between ,god and the rabbies4 ,if the rabbinic additions were specimens of profound wisdom in legislation1 or had a tendency to promote either the moral or temporal welfare of mankind1 there would be some excuse1 but what shall we say of those who transgress a plain command for the sake of such an addition as the following3-- 1 8,the flesh by itself is lawful1 and the milk by itself is lawful1 but as soon they are mixed together by means of boiling 7or cooking7 they both become unlawful4 ,in what cases does this hold8 ,when both are boiled together1 or when one being hot falls into the other also being hot1 or when one1 cold1 falls into the other hot4 ,but if one of them being hot falls upon the second being cold1 then all that part of the meat which was touched by the milk is to be peeled off1 and the remainder may be eaten4 ,but if one in a cold state falls upon the other also cold1 then that piece is to be washed1 and after that may be eaten40 7,hilchoth ,maakhaloth ,asuroth1 c4 ix4 #ag47 ,we have1 in the first place1 an unwarranted extension of the divine command4 ,god has simply forbidden to seethe a kid in its mother's milk4 ,the rabbies first extend this to the young of kine1 and sheep4 ,then they advance another step and forbid the boiling or cooking of any sort of meat in milk1 and now we have seen another advance still1 whereby even any mixture of flesh and milk is strictly forbidden4 ,thus the rabbies aim at universal dominion1 and are satisfied with nothing short of an entire subjugation of the heart and conscience4 ,other tyrants must rest satisfied with the enslavement of the body1 but cannot touch the thought4 ,the authors of the oral law attack the liberty of thought1 and intrude even into the kitchens of their victims4 ,they are determined that their followers shall not eat excepting as they please1 and boldly invade the prerogative of ,god himself1 by forbidding the food which he provides for his people4 ,but this extract presents1 in the second place1 an outrage on common sense4 ,if milk and meat each be lawful by itself1 how can the mixture make them unlawful8 ,whatever ,god forbids is unlawful1 no matter whether we understand the reason or not4 ,but here the rabbies themselves acknowledge that ,god has not forbidden this mixture2 but that the prohibition is entirely their own invention4 ,we are therefore bound to use our senses1 if ,god has given us any1 and to ask a reason why4 ,then1 again1 why should that which is lawful when cold1 be made unlawful by being hot8 ,it may be said1 that this is a matter of little importance4 ,in itself it is2 but as a burden on the consciences of men1 it is of the very highest importance1 and as a cheat upon the ignorant it is more important still4 ,in many countries1 these and similar inventions constitute the whole religion of the ignorant1 and especially of the women4 ,the oral law affirms that it is not necessary to teach women the law of ,god1 but it is almost a matter of life and death that they should know these rabbinic laws about meat and milk4 ,if a woman is unable to read the ,word of ,god1 and is as ignorant as a heathen1 of ,god's will1 the rabbies think that is a trifle4 ,but if a woman were1 through ignorance to serve up meat with any admixture of milk1 the whole family would be in an uproar1 and the rabbi himself would have to be consulted about a remedy for so dreadful a calamity4 ,the consequence is1 that with the mass of the uneducated1 accuracy in these observances passes for piety1 and these poor beings hope that they are going straight to heaven1 when they are utterly devoid or ignorant of that holiness1 truth1 and purity1 which are the first essentials for admission into the presence of ,god4 ,thus the oral law destroys the souls of multitudes1 but others will have to answer for their blood4 ,all who uphold the system must share in the responsibility4 ,the rabbies who teach1 the learned ,jews who aid and abet1 the priests and ,levites to whom ,god has committed the pastorship of his people1 but who neglect their sacred office1 all will have to answer for the souls of the lost4 ,but most of all those who know that these things are wrong1 who themselves eat meat and milk1 and laugh at rabbinic superstition1 and yet are insensible to the miseries of their poor and ignorant brethren4 ,every one practically acquainted with the working of these laws1 knows not only that they beget a false notion of religion1 but that they are also a torment in this life4 ,in domestic and culinary economy1 accidents will happen4 ,meat may fall into milk1 or milk into a pot of meat4 ,misery and vexation are the consequence1 and if the unfortunate woman to whom the accident has happened cannot get satisfaction at home1 she must go to the rabbi to inquire what is to be done4 ,for instance-- 1 1 1 1 1 8,with respect to meat which falls into milk1 or milk that falls into the midst of meat1 the measure is1 if it give a taste8 ,how so8 ,if a peace of meat fall into a boiling pot of milk1 a ,gentile is to taste the contents of the pot3 and if he says that it has a taste of meat1 then it is unlawful4 ,but if it has not the taste of meat1 then the milk is lawful1 but that piece of meat is unlawful4 ,in what cases does this hold8 ,in case that the piece of meat has been taken out1 before it has emitted the milk which it has sucked in4 ,but if it has not been taken out1 then a calculation must be made whether its proportion to the whole is as one to sixty2 because the milk that was sucked in1 and had become unlawful1 has been emitted and has mixed with the rest of the milk40 7,ibid47 ,now1 in the most tolerable case1 that is1 if the owner of the milk can afford to lose it and the meat too1 there is1 first1 an unnecessary inconvenience and vexation1 which no man has a right to inflict upon another4 ,but there is1 secondly1 and what is of far more consequence1 a great sin in wasting good and wholesome1 and1 according to the written law1 lawful food4 ,if the milk tastes of meat1 then the milk and the meat are rendered not only unlawful but perfectly useless4 ,how then can the ,jews expect peace and plenty1 when their oral law teaches them to despise and cast from them with disdain ,god's blessings8 ,but suppose that the owner of the milk and the meat is a poor man1 and that he has laid out his hard and scanty earnings to provide food for his family1 an accident of this kind will leave them destitute4 ,their last hope of support is taken away1 and they may die of hunger4 ,if they go to the rabbies1 and urge the necessity of the case--plead that they have no more--reason that if meat by itself is lawful1 that milk is also lawful--that the law of ,moses no where forbids this food--the teachers of the oral law will answer1 that their traditions cannot be broken2 and the poor people must learn that to eat food permitted and given by ,god is a sin1 but to die of starvation is lawful4 ,how can men with any of the feelings of humanity believe that such a law is from ,god8--how can men of any common sense suffer the consciences and the bodies of the poor and ignorant to be thus tormented8 ,above all1 how can a nation that prides itself on the purity of its faith yield an idolatrous obedience to cruel and oppressive laws invented by men8 ,it is a vain boast for them to say that they have no images--the oral law and its enactments constitute a whole host of idols4 ,it is an unfounded triumph which they celebrate over the worshippers of ,moloch4 ,the oral law is a deity as fierce and as bloody1 and to it are daily immolated the souls and bodies of the poor and ignorant4 ,any homage rendered to falsehood1 or to cruelty1 is idolatrous2 and every thinking man must admit1 that the worship of the oral law is of this character4 ,to the ,rabbinists themselves we would say1 ,just think whether it be possible that ,god would have given a law so oppressive1 or whether he can have any pleasure in the obedience which is rendered at the expense of mercy8 ,to those who reject the oral law we would say1 ,you have a duty to perform from which nothing can exempt you--and that is1 to rest neither day nor night until ,israel is delivered from this idolatrous worship of men1 and set free from a yoke so oppressive to body and soul4 ,we grant that ,christians have also a duty1 and in these papers we endeavour to discharge our share of it4 ,but the duty incumbent upon ,israelites is tenfold more imperative4 ,the ties of flesh and blood--their office as a kingdom of priests--the mercy of ,god in giving them the law as their inheritance--all increase their responsibility and add to the weight of obligation4 ,it would be a shame for ,israel to be silent when even the ,gentiles cry out for the restoration of the religion of ,moses and the prophets4 ,israelites may have peculiar difficulties4 ,they may be united in commercial relations or by family ties with those who are in bondage to the oral law4 ,they may fear the injury of their worldly prospects--they may dread the frown of relatives and friends4 ,this was also the case of ,abraham1 when he determined to renounce the false gods of his fathers1 and to worship the true ,god alone2 and every one who determines by ,god's help to follow and assert the truth1 must make up his mind to love it even more than life itself4 ,but can a son of ,abraham hesitate8 ,will he forfeit the smile of ,god to escape the frown of friends8 ,nay1 if his friends are still in error1 is this not a double motive to urge him forward in the overthrow of that error8 ,must he not he doubly anxious to deliver his father1 his mother1 his brothers and his sisters from such bondage8 ,the first attempt may be difficult--the immediate results may be unpleasant2 but if for ,god's sake he asserts ,god's truth1 he shall have ,god's blessing1 and at last find peace even amongst those who are now offended4 ,as long as the present state of things continues1 ,israel can never be restored to their ancient position4 ,god in mercy keeps them in dispersion1 to prevent the triumph of the oral law4 ,but when is this state of misery to cease8 ,there must be a beginning4 ,some one follower of ,moses must be zealous enough and bold enough to attack the strong holds of superstition1 and to rouse his brethren to a sense of their condition--some one who not only professes to be a follower of ,moses1 but who has imbibed his spirit1 and whose trust is in the ,god of his fathers4 ,no4 ,,liii4 ,,rabbinism ,,oppressive ,,to ,,the ,,poor4 ,when ,god gave ,israel the law1 by the hand of ,moses1 he also gave them several tests1 whereby they might at all times try themselves1 and know to a certainty whether they were really obedient or not--and whether the laws1 to which they yielded obedience1 were really the laws given by ,moses4 ,one of these tests is found in the following words3--8,behold1 ,i have taught you statutes and judgments1 even as the ,lord my ,god commanded me1 that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it4 ,keep1 therefore1 and do them2 for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations1 which shall hear all these statutes1 and say1 ,surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people40 7,deut4 iv4 #e47 ,by the help of these words1 ,israel may know at any time whether they are really keeping the laws of ,moses4 ,they have only to consult their own experience1 and determine whether they are honoured by all nations on account of their wisdom4 ,moses promises that a reputation for wisdom1 and the honour that accompanies it1 shall be the reward of obedience4 ,if therefore the ,jews at this present time are obedient1 this promise must be in daily fulfilment4 ,but1 if they are not honoured and respected for their wisdom1 then we must conclude1 that they are deficient in obedience1 and further1 that the laws to which they are at present so devoted are not the laws of ,moses4 ,now it is a certain fact1 that admiration for the wisdom of ,israel has not been the prevailing sentiment amongst the nations of the world for the last two thousand years4 ,the ,jewish people has been most deplorably underrated4 ,their genius and their literature have been ignorantly undervalued1 and the folly of the authors of the oral law has been unjustly visited upon each and every individual of the nation4 ,we grant the injustice and the impiety of such hasty judgments1 but cannot deny the fact1 and the fact proves that the laws to which ,israel now yields obedience are not the laws of ,moses4 ,they now obey the commands of the oral law1 and the nations have heard of the statutes thereof1 but no one says1 8,surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people40 ,some may1 perhaps1 ascribe this to prejudice1 and no doubt there are cases where prejudice has much to do with the decision1 but this is not our case4 ,our prepossessions are all in favour of the ,jews1 and yet we cannot help questioning the wisdom of those1 who make such laws as the following a part of their religion3-- 1 1 8,it is not lawful to knead the dough with milk1 and if it be done1 all the bread is unlawful1 lest this should lead to further transgression1 and it should be eaten with meat4 ,it is also unlawful to smear the oven with the tail of a sheep2 and if it be done1 all the bread is unlawful1 lest milk should be eaten with it4 ,but1 if some change be made in the form of the bread whereby it may be recognized1 so as that neither meat nor milk should be eaten with it1 then it is lawful40 7,hilchoth ,maakhaloth ,asuroth1 c4 ix4 #bb47 ,we do not wish to persuade the ,jews either to knead dough with milk1 or to smear an oven with the tail of a sheep1 but when we remember all the poverty and want that is in the world1 we cannot help asking1 ,what is there so sinful in either of the above actions1 as to make such bread unlawful for the use of ,god's people8 ,has ,god forbidden it8 or has he so strictly prohibited the use of meat and milk together1 as to make this excess of caution necessary8 ,neither the one nor the other4 ,the law of ,god as given by ,moses1 allows the use of meat and milk together4 ,it forbids only one particular case1 the boiling of a kid in its mother's milk3 and to this the rabbies have1 without any authority1 added all these other commands1 and thus burdened the conscience1 and made religion an intricate and difficult science intelligible only to the learned1 and not always to them4 ,what wisdom is there in forbidding what ,god did not think necessary to forbid8 ,what wisdom is there in neglecting or disregarding the revealed will of ,god1 and giving up the conscience to the guidance of weak and fallible men like ourselves8 ,but above all1 what wisdom is there in oppressing and tormenting the poor8 ,the oral law says-- 4 8,he that eats cheese or milk first1 may eat meat immediately after4 8,he that eats meat first1 whether it be the meat of a beast or of a fowl1 must not eat milk after it1 until the regular time between two meals1 that is six hours1 shall have elapsed2 because of the meat which remains between the teeth1 and which is not got out by wiping40 7,ibid41 #bf1 #bh47 ,now in the case of the rich or the affluent1 who can procure a good and sufficient meal of meat1 and can therefore wait for six hours1 this may be no great hardship1 though even in that case1 we must protest against the unauthorized burden imposed upon the conscience2 but when applied to the needy and the destitute1 this law becomes an intolerable yoke4 ,just suppose the father of a starving family who goes forth to beg assistance from the charitable4 ,he receives a small portion of meat1 and hastens back to divide it with his wife and children4 ,they partake of the relief1 but it is not sufficient to supply their wants4 ,he therefore goes forth again1 and some friend of the poor gives him some milk or cheese1 he brings it home with thankfulness1 but dare not touch it himself nor give it to his children--they have already fasted many an hour--they are still weak with hunger--a little of the milk or the cheese would recruit exhausted nature--the children cry and entreat for six hours more1 for though ,god allows this food1 rabbies have forbidden it4 ,is there wisdom in this8 ,is ,god honoured by such a religion1 which counts his permission as nothing1 and exalts the authority of the rabbies above that of ,god himself8 ,and may we not ask the some question of the following law8 1 8,he that eats ,gentile cheese1 or milk which a ,gentile has milked1 but the ,israelite did not see him1 is to be flogged with the flogging of rebellion4 ,but1 as to the butter1 some of the ,gaons have pronounced it lawful1 because there is no express decision about it1 and because unclean milk will not set4 ,others of the ,gaons1 on the contrary1 have pronounced it unlawful1 on account of the small drops of milk which remain in it40 7,joreh ,deah1 #aae47 ,here we have the same total want of consideration for the poor1 and the same fierce and cruel spirit4 ,just suppose1 again1 the case of a destitute ,jewish family1 where the father is laid on a bed of sickness1 and unable to earn daily bread for his children4 ,the mother1 weary with tending the sick couch of her husband1 and her heart half-broken with the children's cry for bread1 goes to solicit help from the almoners of the synagogue4 ,she obtains eighteen pence per month1 but finds that on this small sum it is impossible for a family to subsist2 she then goes to individuals of her nation1 and gets what she can1 but still not sufficient to the wants of her children1 and of her sick husband4 ,in her distress1 she goes to some ,christian neighbours1 who give her some milk and cheese4 ,the pangs of hunger1 and the affections of a wife and mother overcome her superstition1 she carries this bounty home and partakes of it along with her husband and children4 ,has1 she thereby committed a sin2 has she violated any one precept of the ,mosaic law2 has she blasphemed the name of her ,god8 ,let reason1 let the ,law and the ,prophets answer1 and they will say1 ,no3 she has done her duty4 ,but what does the oral law say8 ,it says1 that she has committed a dreadful sin4 ,and what is to be her punishment1 and that of her husband and children8 ,flogging--the flogging of rebellion4 ,if the oral law had power1 it would lead them forth to the place of execution1 and there inflict stripes without number and without mercy4 ,the bystanders1 and those attracted by the cries would ask1 ,what dreadful crime has this family committed8 and the answer would be1 ,to save themselves from starvation they dared to eat ,gentile cheese and milk4 ,gentiles would ask again1 ,what1 is this the law8 ,does ,judaism teach that so innocent an action is to be punished with such severity8 and being answered in the affirmative1 would go away exclaiming1 8,what a merciful religion6 ,surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people60 ,no3 they would retire in horror1 thanking ,god that they are not ,jews1 and that ,god has preserved them from so dreadful a delusion1 and from such iniquitous cruelty4 ,what1 then1 do our ,jewish readers think of this law1 and the religion of which it is a part8 ,it is certain that there are multitudes of ,jews in this city who live in the constant violation of this command2 who constantly use milk supplied by ,gentiles1 and yet pretend to profess ,judaism as their religion4 ,let all such ask themselves1 by what authority they transgress a command sanctioned by so severe a punishment4 ,is it because they think it irrational1 or unwarranted by the law of ,moses8 if so1 they attack at once the authority of the whole system of ,judaism4 ,if the oral low can be proved to be absurd1 or unjust1 or cruel1 in any one particular1 its value as a divine tradition is utterly destroyed4 ,let them1 then1 be consistent2 if they reject ,judaism1 let them say so1 let them not pretend to have the ,jewish religion1 when they have it not4 ,let them honestly confess that their reason1 directed by ,scripture1 has led them to reject it2 and let them fulfil the consequent duty of endeavouring to deliver their poor brethren from a bondage so cruel4 ,they must know that these laws about milk and butter1 and the art of slaughtering1 cut off many a poor ,jew from the last refuge of the destitute--the poor-house4 ,many a one who is now starving with his family1 would be glad to have the relief which the parish provides1 but he dare not accept of it4 ,either his conscience1 perverted by these rabbinical statutes1 will not permit him1 or he is afraid of his brethren1 who would think that in going into such an asylum he had renounced his ,god4 ,those who use ,gentile milk without scruple1 will have much to answer for1 if they suffer such oppression and such superstition to continue4 ,it is a vain excuse for any one to say1 8,what can ,i do80 ,any one individual1 however weak and uninfluential1 has it in his power by ,god's blessing1 to deliver the poor4 ,let him continually protest against such superstition1 let him reason with his brethren4 ,let him determine to take no rest1 until the yoke is torn from the necks of his nation4 ,he will ultimately prevail4 ,he will be the instrument in ,god's hand1 of offering a greater deliverance than that from ,egypt1 inasmuch as the emancipation of the soul is of more importance than that of the body4 ,in this respect1 amongst others1 ,jesus of ,nazareth has done more than ,moses4 ,if he had not arisen1 the oral law would have been universal1 and the world have continued either sunk in idolatry or slaves to a cruel superstition4 ,the cruelty of a religion1 which commands a man to be flogged for eating that which ,god permits1 is not to be disputed2 the prohibition of ,gentile bread furnishes another instance of similar inhumanity4 8,there are some things which the wise men have pronounced unlawful1 although they have no foundation for the prohibition in the law1 as bread of the ,gentiles1 even though an ,israelite should have baked it for him--and cooked victuals1 which the ,gentiles have cooked4 ,they have also pronounced it unlawful to drink at a ,gentile table1 even those drinks of which there can be no suspicion that wine of libation is mixed with them4 ,and they pronounced these things unlawful to prevent the possibility of intermarriage10 c4 7,ibid4 #aab47 ,there are many remarks suggested by this passage1 but at present we limit ourselves to the prohibition of ,gentile bread4 ,it is here confessed that there is no foundation for it in the law of ,moses1 and that therefore the rabbies have no authority for the prohibition2 and yet a very little consideration is sufficient to show that great inconvenience may arise4 ,for instance1 if a poor ,jew is travelling in this country1 exhausts his stock of money1 and goes to a farm-house to ask relief1 he cannot accept any meat--he is not to drink any milk on pain of a flogging4 ,suppose1 then1 that the people offer him some home-baked bread1 even this is forbidden3-- 8,bread baked by a private house-keeper is eternally forbidden40 ,the poor man1 therefore1 may starve4 ,but the inhumanity appears still more in the discussion of the question1 whether and when it is lawful to eat baker's bread4 ,the rabbies are divided4 ,some allow it1 because the rule is-- 1 8,he that has fasted three days may lawfully eat ,gentile bread1 and as in many places of our captivity there is no ,israelite baker1 this case is considered parallel to that of him who has fasted three days4 ,but there are others who say that it is unlawful1 unless he has fasted three days1 in the strictest sense of the word40 7,ibid47 ,one would think that1 in a case of doubt1 men that had the fear of ,god would naturally incline to the side of mercy2 but here we find teachers of religion forbidding what ,god has allowed1 unless the victim of poverty has first endured the torment of starvation for three days2 and in one case actually determining that a fellow-creature shall die of hunger1 rather than suffer their unauthorized traditions to be broken4 ,if a ,gentile ,government should seize on a number of unfortunate ,israelites guilty of no crime1 and shut them up in a prison1 and then leave them to die of starvation1 what just indignation would be excited6 ,every man would protest against such wanton cruelty1 and yet this is just what modern ,judaism has done4 ,by forbidding ,gentile meat1 milk1 cheese1 and bread1 it has consigned hundreds to starvation4 ,there are at this moment numbers of individuals1 if not families1 pining away in want1 whose wants could be relieved1 if the oral law did not interpose its iron front1 and pronounce starvation lawful1 and help from ,gentiles unlawful2 and yet their brethren1 who pride themselves upon their benevolence and humanity1 leave them to perish1 and suffer the system to remain that it may be a curse to coming generations4 ,it is truly astonishing to see the indifference of those who pride themselves upon their emancipation from superstition1 and who themselves eat ,gentile bread1 and milk1 and cheese1 and perhaps meat1 without any scruple4 ,it is more astonishing still1 how the nation at large suffers itself to be deluded by men who do not agree amongst themselves as to what the law really is4 ,we saw above1 that the greatest of the rabbies1 even the ,gaons themselves1 differ as to the lawfulness of ,gentile butter2--here we see that they cannot agree as to the lawfulness of ,gentile bakers' bread4 ,how is it1 then1 that the ,jews cannot see that their present religion of the oral law is altogether one of uncertainty and that1 therefore1 there is no dependence upon it8 ,here they eat freely1 even the strictest1 of ,gentile bread2 but yet1 according to some of their greatest men1 they are thereby committing a deadly sin4 ,these wise men humanely say1 that it is necessary first to fast for three days4 ,now of what use is an oral law that cannot even tell us certainly what sort of bread it is unlawful to eat8 ,the ,rabbinist boast is1 that the oral law teaches them the true meaning of the written law1 and thus saves them from all doubtful disputation4 ,but how can that be true1 when the oral law has not yet settled when it is lawful to eat ,gentile bread8 ,if the rabbies cannot agree on so simple a matter1 what trust can be placed in them in difficult questions8 ,the ,jews cannot even tell1 by the help of their religion1 whether they are not committing a sin1 and leading their children to commit a sin1 when they give them a piece of bread and butter4 ,how1 then1 can they be satisfied with a religion where the simplest concerns of life are still a matter of doubt and disputation2 and especially where the poor are made to suffer the greatest hardships1 whilst1 by keeping to ,moses and the prophets1 they might find relief8 ,but1 above all1 how can they believe that a religion is divine1 or its authors good and pious men1 when an innocent action1 nay1 the fulfilment of a natural duty1 is punished with flogging8 ,there is no punishment of which the oral law is so fond2 and it would be a curious and interesting employment to furnish a list of all the offences to which it is annexed4 ,perhaps in nothing does the ,talmud differ more from the ,new ,testament4 ,the ,new ,testament has not1 in any one case1 prescribed so cruel a punishment4 ,the ,talmud and all its compendiums prescribe it on the most trifling occasion4 ,the maxim of the ,new ,testament is that of the ,old also1 8,i will have mercy1 not sacrifice40 ,now1 if the practice of mercy be more agreeable in the eyes of ,god1 than even those ceremonial rites which he himself ordained1 with what pleasure can he contemplate the religion of the oral law1 which punishes1 even what ,god has allowed1 with unmeasured cruelty8 ,aben ,ezra supposed that this command1 8,not to seethe a kid in its mother's milk10 was given in order to prevent cruelty even to the brute creation2 if this be true1 how does ,god regard the perversion of his mercy1 which pretends to keep this command1 to spare the brute creation1 by dooming hundreds of mankind to starvation1 and by flogging those who endeavour to escape from their misery by eating what he has nowhere forbidden8 ,if ,god has compassion upon the beasts that perish1 what can he think of those teachers of religion who talk with such composure of a fellow-creature's fasting for three days before he may eat bread sold by a ,gentile baker1 and who absolutely decide that it is his duty to die1 rather than partake of bread baked by a private individual who is not a ,jew8 ,we appeal to the good sense of every ,israelite to answer these questions4 ,is it not evident that the ,god of mercy must view with indignation1 those teachers who thus misrepresent the nature of revealed religion1 and who cause his holy name to be blasphemed amongst the ignorant8 ,but if those men are guilty1 a portion of their guilt rests upon all those who aid and abet in upholding the system4 ,there can be but little excuse for those who have the ,law and the ,prophets in their hands1 and who therefore ought to know1 that the cruelty of the oral law is as contrary to the character of ,god1 as light is to darkness4 ,and there is no excuse at all for those ,israelites who themselves despise these ,rabbinical laws1 and yet by their silence and indifference leave their brethren still in misery4 ,they are answerable for all the dishonour done to ,god2 for all the misery inflicted upon man2 and for all the contempt heaped upon the wisdom of ,israel4 ,no4 ,,liv4 ,,gentile ,,wine4 ,the ,jews of the present day have got one religion--the ,christians have got another4 ,it is much to be desired that all the sons of men should have the one true religion1 but1 as this is not likely to be the case for some little time longer1 it becomes those who differ to examine the nature and grounds of their differences4 ,whatever ,jews may think upon the subject1 ,christians feel themselves bound to inquire whether they have really erred so grievously as modern ,judaism asserts4 ,the oral law brings no less a charge against them than this1 ,that they are guilty of idolatry1 and therefore in a worse state than even the ,mahometans4 1 1 8,as to those ,gentiles who1 like the ,ishmaelites1 are not idolaters1 their wine is unlawful to drink1 but is lawful for purposes of profit1 as is taught by all the ,gaons2 but ,christians are idolaters1 and their wine1 even such as has not been used as wine of libation1 is unlawful even for purposes of profit40 7,hilchoth ,maakhaloth ,asuroth1 c4 xi4 #g47 ,these words are very plain1 and are confirmed by the practice of ,rabbinists in every part of the world1 who abstain as carefully from the wine belonging to ,christians1 as their forefathers would have done from the idolatrous libation of the ,canaanites4 ,jews1 therefore cannot be astonished if we examine with care a religion that brings against us so grave an accusation1 and endeavour to defend ourselves against the charge4 ,we might ask them1 whether they behold in our churches any of the emblems of idolatry4 ,we might refer them to the ten commandments written up in the most holy place of our sacred edifices4 ,we might quote from the ,new ,testament many warnings against idolatry as plain and as solemn as any to be found in the law of ,moses2 but there is a previous question to be considered1 and that is1 ,what is the character of that system1 which witnesses against us8 ,is it worthy of credit--can its testimony be depended upon8 ,if the oral law be really from ,god1 and if its teachers should appear as faithful depositories of ,divine truth1 their testimony would have great weight4 ,but if the rabbies be detected as daring corrupters of ,divine revelation1 and their religion be proved to be a perversion of the law of ,moses1 then this charge must fall to the ground as unworthy of all credit2 and this is what we assert4 ,we have already given many reasons in support of this assertion1 and now add some more which we find in the laws about 1 8wine of libation10 which laws appear to us to be not only unwarranted additions1 but unmerciful1 uncharitable1 and irrational4 ,we do not mean to deny that it is utterly unlawful to partake of wine that has been consecrated to idols2 on the contrary1 we would assert this as zealously as any ,israelite4 ,concerning things offered to idols1 the ,new ,testament says1 8,the things which the ,gentiles sacrifice1 they sacrifice to devils1 and not to ,god3 and ,i would not that ye should have fellowship with devils4 ,ye cannot drink the cup of the ,lord1 and the cup of devils40 7#a ,cor4 x4 #bj1 #ba47 ,let not therefore any ,israelite think that we wish to defend what is contrary both to the ,old and ,new ,testament4 ,but though fully convinced of the unlawfulness of drinking wine or anything else consecrated to the service of idolatry1 we confess that we cannot see why it is unlawful to make use of wine not consecrated to idolatry1 simply because it belongs to1 or has been touched by1 a ,gentile2 and yet this is the rabbinic law3-- 1 8,wine belonging to ,gentiles1 of which we do not know whether it has been consecrated or not1 and what is called common ,gentile wine1 is unlawful even to make a profit of1 just like wine that has been consecrated2 and this is by the decree of the scribes4 ,whosoever drinks so much as one quarter measure of this common ,gentile wine is to be flogged with the flogging of rebellion4 ,all wine also which a ,gentile touches is unlawful because he may have consecrated it1 for the thought of a ,gentile is to idolatry4 ,hence thou hast learned1 that concerning wine belonging to an ,israelite which a ,gentile has touched1 the law is the same as in the case of common ,gentile wine1 which is unlawful even to make a profit of40 7,ibid41 #c1 #d47 ,now in this law we have first the unauthorized additions of the rabbies4 ,we have already granted1 that wine1 and everything else1 consecrated to the service of idols is unlawful1 but with this the rabbies are not content4 ,they forbid wine that was made by1 or ever in the possession of1 a ,gentile1 or even if a ,gentile has touched it1 and that not only to drink it1 but to make any use of it1 or to sell it1 or to be in any way employed about it1 so as to make any profit by it4 1 1 1 1 8,the wise men have been very strict with respect to the common ,gentile wine1 and have pronounced its price to be unlawful1 as that of wine which has been consecrated to idolatry2 therefore1 if a ,gentile have an ,israelite to labour with him1 in any thing concerning wine1 his wages are unlawful4 ,in like manner1 if he hire an ass1 or a ship1 to carry wine1 the hire thereof is unlawful3 and if it be given to him in money1 he is to throw it into the salt sea4 ,but if the hire be given him in clothes1 or vessels1 or fruits1 he is to burn them1 and to bury their ashes1 that no profit may arise therefrom4 ,but if an ,israelite has hired an ass to a ,gentile to ride upon1 and he lays upon it bottles of wine1 then the hire thereof is lawful40 7,ibid41 c4 xiii4 #ae1 c47 ,for all this there is no authority whatever in the law of ,moses1--it is a pure invention of the rabbies1 who had but little respect for the ,divine law1 and no consideration at all for the necessities of man4 ,it is evident that these additions must1 in many cases1 become so many impediments in the way of earning a subsistence4 ,the proprietor of a ship1 or the owner of cattle1 is cut off from one source of employment and profit4 ,now1 even in the case of the rich1 though they may feel it less1 this is an unjustifiable severity2 but in the case of the poor1 it becomes a most cruel oppression4 ,in the wine-countries1 for example1 a poor ,jew might perchance find employment with some of the growers of that article2 but the rabbies have declared that honest industry1 in a matter which ,god has nowhere forbidden1 is unlawful1 and the fruits of it so abominable1 as to be fit only for destruction4 ,in this city1 also1 many examples of the absurdity and cruelty of this law might be found4 ,suppose that a ,christian wine-merchant should wish to employ some one or more of those numerous ,israelites1 who are destitute of the means of earning a livelihood1 and should therefore offer him a situation1 either in his cellar or his counting-house1 the rabbies say that he dare not accept of it3 and that it is more pleasing in the sight of ,god that the man should go about idle1 and that his family should starve1 than that he should labour honestly1 and do what ,god has permitted4 ,who is there1 except the rabbies themselves1 who does not see that such a decision is irrational1 oppressive1 and unmerciful1 not now to speak of its injustice to ,christian nations1 by classing them with the idolaters of ,canaan8 ,but take another case1 suppose that some ,christian1 finding a ,jewish family in deep distress1 some of the members perhaps recovering from sickness1 to whom a little wine might be beneficial1 gives them a bottle of wine1 ,what are they to do with it8 ,may they make use of it to strengthen their exhausted frames8 ,the rabbies answer1 ,no4 ,may they sell it1 and with the money purchase food1 or some other necessary of life8 ,the rabbies answer1 ,no4 ,what then are they to do with it8 ,the rabbies answer1 ,destroy it2 destroy what would recruit your fainting bodies--what would purchase bread for your starving children--destroy what might perhaps save your life1 simply because we have forbidden it2 and it is more important that our unauthorized laws should be preserved inviolate1 than that you should be comforted or strengthened or relieved in your misery4 ,this is the mercy of ,judaism4 ,but we have not done yet4 ,suppose that the mother of the family should begin to reason1 and say1 ,this wine would preserve my poor child's life2 a little of it would strengthen me1 and enable me to tend the sick bed with more alacrity2 ,god has nowhere forbidden it4 ,she accordingly administers to her child1 and partakes herself1 when some rabbinic zealot enters and perceives what she has done4 ,now suppose that the ministers of the oral law had the liberty to follow out all its enactments1 what would be the consequence8 ,the poor woman would be summoned before a 1 a tribunal2 the oral law would be opened1 and her sentence be1 ,the flogging of rebellion1 as we have cited above4 ,is this merciful1 is it just1 is it rational8 ,is there anything like it in the ,new ,testament1 or in the religion of ,jesus of ,nazareth8 ,the oral law says that we are idolaters1 but is it worthy of credit8 ,can any reasonable man place confidence in the teaching of those who are so senseless as to forbid a perishing fellow-creature to make use of proffered relief1 and so merciless as to flog him with the flogging of rebellion1 if he regards ,god's permission more than their prohibition8 ,but it is not only absurdity and cruelty1 which here are to be noticed1 there is also a certain measure of that cleverness which we have remarked on former occasions1 which provides for the transgression of the law and the retaining of the merit of keeping it4 ,the above extract says1 8,if an ,israelite has hired an ass to a ,gentile to ride upon1 and he lays upon it bottles of wine1 then the hire thereof is lawful20 and on this principle the owner of a ship or a wagon may let either generally for the transport of merchandize1 and provided the word wine is not mentioned1 the ,gentile may transport his wine1 and the ,jew lawfully receive and use his money1 though if the word wine had been mentioned1 the money would have been so unlawful1 that it ought not even be given to relieve the wants of the poor1 but thrown into the salt sea4 ,here the rabbies betray their own insincerity1 and their unbelief in their own enactments1 by their determination to evade their severity1 whenever it interfered with their own interests4 ,but even if there were no cruelty1 no contempt for the law of ,god1 and no evasion1 the effect of multiplying such observances is to lead away the mind from the weightier matters of religion4 ,the ignorant think1 even whilst they are violating the ten commandments1 that1 if they abstain from ,gentile wine1 they are fulfilling a most meritorious duty1 and making compensation for their other transgressions4 ,indeed the rabbies themselves are not free from this effect1 if we may judge by the following passage3-- 8,if a ,gentile harlot be at an entertainment of ,israelites1 the wine is lawful1 for their fear is upon her1 so that she would not touch it4 ,but if an ,israelite harlot be at an entertainment of ,gentiles1 her wine that is before her in her own vessel is unlawful1 because they may touch it without her knowledge40 7,ibid41 c4 xii4 #bf47 ,now if men or women are so wicked as to be found in such circumstances1 in the open disregard of ,god's law1 is it not deceiving them to tell them1 or to lead them to suppose1 that there can be any merit in any mere ceremonial observance1 even though it should have been ordained by ,god himself3 and is it not straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel1 to forbid a poor perishing ,jew to taste wine touched by a ,gentile1 and to allow it to those who are feasting with a harlot8 ,perhaps some one will reply that it is on account of the idolatry of the ,gentile2 but we have seen in the first extract given in this paper1 that if wine be touched even by a ,gentile who is not an idolater1 it is unlawful for a ,jew to drink it2 so that to be a ,gentile at all is in the eyes of the rabbies a greater degradation and of more contaminating influence1 than to be guilty of gross immorality4 ,now we appeal to the good sense of every ,israelite1 whether this is not to exalt vice1 and to degrade humanity8 ,god chose a people to himself1 ,israel is that people2 we honour them as such3 but1 is that any reason why ,israel should trample upon the ties of our common humanity1 and look upon the touch even of a ,gentile who fears ,god1 as so defiling that it makes wine unfit for the use of a ,jew8 ,how are peace and charity ever to prevail between ,jews and ,gentiles1 so long as this is looked upon as religion8 ,yea1 and how is true religion and true fear of ,god ever to prevail amongst the mass of the ,jewish community1 so long as they are taught that ,israelites guilty of immorality are more holy than a ,gentile who fears ,god1 and that sin is not so dreadful as uncircumcision8 ,the object of such commands was plainly to prevent all social and friendly intercourse between ,jews and ,gentiles under any circumstances1 and to build up an eternal wall of separation between them4 ,this is very different from that national and official distinction instituted by ,god himself4 ,the object of ,god's choice was not to put an end to the practice of love and charity between the ,jews and all the other nations of the earth1 but to cement the bonds of affection4 ,he made ,israel the depository of his oracles1 that they might communicate the truth to other nations1 and that thus the nations should feel gratitude for the benefit conferred1 and the ,israelites feel that affection for the nations1 which a teacher naturally feels for those who1 by his instrumentality1 have forsaken error and embraced the truth4 ,the oral law prevents the fulfilment of the ,divine law1 and cuts asunder also these ties of amity and peace4 ,it makes it impossible for ,israel to communicate any blessing1 and for the ,gentiles to receive any blessing at their hands1 and goes far towards throwing suspicion on the ,divine law4 ,if there were no other medium of communication1 than the rabbies1 between the ,divine law and the world1 the worship of ,jupiter and ,bacchus and all the other heathen deities would still prevail4 ,how could the nations ever have been converted by those who taught them1 in the first place1 that ,god is such a respecter of persons1 as to think immorality in a ,jew less contaminating than the mere external touch of a pious ,gentile8 ,reason revolts at such profane absurdity1 and therefore if ,god had had no better messengers and representatives of his truth1 idolatry would still continue4 ,some may reply1 idolatry does still continue1 such at least is the sentence of the oral law1 and1 though grieved that any should be so blind as to bring such a charge against ,christianity1 we are by no means angry or offended at it4 ,if the ,jews still believe in their own religion1 and therefore think that ,christians are idolaters1 it is their bounden duty to say so4 ,but then we ask in reply1 if ,christianity be idolatry1 how is it that its doctrine is more pure1 more merciful1 more charitable1 and more rational than that of the oral law8 ,christianity has no ceremonial laws to be observed by those who feast together with harlots--,christianity nowhere sentences the poor to flogging1 because they partake of what ,god allows--,christianity nowhere represents ,god as an unjust and impartial judge1 who looks not at moral good and evil1 but at a man's nation4 ,christianity teaches that true religion is that of the heart--that at the day of judgment mercilessness will obtain no mercy1 and that ,god is the ,god of the spirits of all flesh4 ,let then the lovers of the oral law account for this fact1 that ,christianity1 which they call idolatry1 teaches a doctrine that glorifies ,god and benefits all men2 whilst ,judaism1 which they say is the truth1 teaches a doctrine dishonouring to ,god1 oppressive to the ,jews1 and degrading to all other nations4 ,some ,jews will reply1 that ,christians are not idolaters2 then we ask such persons how they can pretend to profess ,judaism1 which has asserted the contrary for so many centuries1 and also acted upon this principle1 prohibiting all intercourse1 as much as ,moses did in the land of ,canaan8 ,either ,christianity is idolatry1 or ,judaism is false2 there is no alternative4 ,every ,jew1 therefore1 who asserts that ,christians are not idolaters1 pronounces of ,judaism that it is false4 ,let all such persons then deal honestly1 let them renounce what they do not believe2 and let them denounce to their brethren what they think it necessary to disavow before ,christians4 ,they are bound to do this1 not only to renounce the injustice with which the oral law treats ,christians1 but to take away the cruel and oppressive yoke which bows down their brethren the ,jews4 ,if ,christianity be not idolatry1 then all the laws concerning 1 8wine of libation10 are utterly out of place in this country4 ,then poor ,jews may accept of ,christian bounty1 and the offices of kindliness and charity may be practised between ,jew and ,christian4 ,those ,jews therefore who profess to believe that ,christians are not idolaters1 are bound1 by their obligations both to ,jews and ,christians1 to protest against the oral law1 and publicly to disavow all belief in it4 ,so long as they do not make such a public disavowal1 their professions of love and charity and respect for the religion of ,christians must be looked upon as hollow and insincere4 ,so long as they make such professions1 contrary to the oral law1 and yet frequent the worship of the synagogue1 which asserts the divinity of the oral law1 they must be regarded either as persons who have motives for professing what they do not feel1 or who want moral courage to renounce what they disapprove4 ,these remarks apply particularly to those ,israelites who have practically forsaken ,judaism1 who associate with ,christians1 eat ,gentile food1 and drink ,gentile wine1 and some of whom perhaps even deal in it as an article of merchandize4 ,such persons1 though ,israelites by nation1 are not ,jews by religion1 at least according to that sense in which the word ,jew has been used both by ,israel and ,gentile nations for the last two thousand years4 ,such persons cannot pretend to be professors of the ,jewish persuasion4 ,any one who is in the habit of drinking ,gentile wine has practically forsaken ,judaism1 just as much as if he had assumed the turban and professed himself a ,mahometan4 ,it becomes such persons especially to make a stand against the oral law1 and to declare publicly what their religion is1 and whether they have any fixed principles at all4 ,they cannot be regarded as ,christians1 for they have not been baptized2 they cannot1 say that they are ,jews1 for they have forsaken ,judaism2 they cannot assert that they have the religion of ,moses1 for unless that religion be found amongst ,christians1 it does not exist4 ,there is no body of religionists to be found in this country who profess themselves ,mosaists4 ,in the synagogue the oral law is professed2 in the ,church ,christianity is professed2 but where is the place of worship frequented by those who have forsaken ,judaism without embracing ,christianity8 ,such persons appear in a light that is not at all advantageous to their principles4 ,in private they profess to abhor the intolerance of the oral law1 they violate its precepts1 and yet on the occasion of the great ,jewish fasts and festivals they are to be seen in the synagogue joining in the worship1 and observing the rites of the oral law4 ,what then are we to believe concerning such persons8 ,are they indifferentists1 who have no religion at all8 or are they secret admirers of the oral law1 who1 for worldly purposes1 deny it when occasion suits1 and conform to it when the conscience is uneasy8 ,we are far from pronouncing them either one or the other1 but simply propose these questions for their own consideration1 remind them of the equivocal light in which they appear1 and would give them advice similar to that of ,elijah to their forefathers4 ,if the oral law be true religion1 profess and practise it4 ,if the oral law be erroneous1 superstitious1 and uncharitable1 renounce it openly and honestly4 ,no4 ,,lv4 ,,mourning ,,for ,,the ,,dead4 ,modern ,judaism1 or the religion of the ,jews1 as it is professed by the majority of the nation scattered through the world1 confessedly consists of two parts4 ,the first is composed of those laws which are 1 i4e41 which are either really found in the written law1 or are supposed to be based upon some passage of it4 ,the second1 of those laws which are 8of the words of the scribes10 and which are1 therefore1 mere human institutions4 ,concerning those that were given by ,god1 we readily grant that they can be changed or abrogated only by ,god himself4 ,but respecting the latter1 both reason and ,scripture concur in assuring us1 that what human authority has ordained1 a similar human authority may also abrogate4 ,we grant that so long as the ,jewish polity remained1 and the scribes were magistrates1 their ordinances1 so far as they were not contrary to the ,word of ,god1 were binding upon the ,jews3 but even then those ordinances were not immutable4 ,they might have been repealed by the scribes and magistrates who succeeded them4 ,and even then1 whenever they stood in opposition to the ,word of ,god1 it was the bounden duty of the ,jews to refuse obedience4 ,for what reason1 then do the ,jews of the present day still pay the same homage to the words of the scribes that they do to the ,word of ,god8 ,the scribes are not now the civil magistrates of the countries where the ,jews reside2 their words1 therefore1 carry with them no authority whatever4 ,the ,jews are now in different circumstances--are subject to other magistrates and lawgivers4 ,the magisterial sanction1 which the words of the scribes had before the dispersion1 has long since been lost2 but ,god nowhere commands the ,jews in ,england to obey laws made by the civil magistrates of ,palestine two thousand years ago4 ,there is not a shadow of obligation remaining2 and therefore the ,jews of the present day have a full right to examine into their tendency and effects1 and if they should be found injurious or unsuitable to present circumstances1 to reject them4 ,if the words of the scribes be not obligatory by virtue of ,divine authority1 the only imaginable reason for observing them is the supposition that they are conducive to the welfare and happiness of ,israel1 but if it can be shown that this supposition is false1 then both reason and religion would suggest the wisdom of rejecting them4 ,we have already shown of several such laws that they are alike noxious to man and dishonouring to ,god1 and think now to exhibit a similar result with regard to the laws concerning mourners for the dead4 ,of many of these it is confessed that they are not of ,god1 but simply ordinances of the scribes3 thus1 of the command to mourn seven days1 it is acknowledged1 that it is not to be found in the law3-- 8,the only mourning commanded in the law is that on the first day1 which is the day of the death and of the burial4 ,but that of the rest of the seven days is not an ordinance of the law40 7,hilchoth ,avel41 c4 i4 #a47 ,and thus with regard to the various things from which the mourner is to abstain during those seven days1 it is acknowledged expressly that the command is altogether an ordinance of the scribes3-- 8,these are the things which the mourner is prohibited from doing1 according to the law1 on the first day1 but according to the words of the scribes on the remaining days--shaving1 washing the clothes1 bathing1 anointing1 duty of marriage1 putting on shoes1 working1 reading in the words of the law1 elevating the chair1 uncovering the head1 asking after the peace of any one40 7,ibid41 c4 v47 ,as therefore the rabbies themselves do not pretend that abstinence from these things during those days of mourning is required in the law2 and it is further a matter of fact1 that this abstinence is not inculcated by the laws of the land1 it naturally becomes a question1 ,why then do the ,jews now observe these rites8 ,are they conducive to the happiness and welfare of ,israel8 ,we might doubt respecting several of them1 but one is so obviously oppressive to the poor as to be almost beyond controversy2 we mean the prohibition to work during the seven days' mourning4 ,we do not mean to deny1 that when death enters a family1 it is a providential call to humiliation and serious reflection1 and that therefore those who can should withdraw for a while from their every-day occupation1 and seek by prayer and penitence to have the affliction turned into a blessing4 ,but to require of those who have not food for themselves or their families to embitter their cup of sorrow by adding the pangs of hunger1 is to act the part of an inconsiderate and merciless tyrant1 and this is what the oral law does4 ,it says-- 1 1 8,all the first three days it is unlawful to work1 even though the man should be so poor as to live on alms4 ,but after that1 if he be poor1 he may work privately in his own house40 ,thus1 all those whose business lies out of doors1 and who are obliged to wander about in order to get a livelihood1 are completely cut off from the possibility of supplying the wants of their family4 ,the law was evidently made under very different circumstances from those in which the ,jewish people are now found4 ,it presupposes that every one has got some trade or occupation whereby he can earn his bread at home1 but this is not the case at present4 ,a large proportion of the people1 in every part of the world1 now get a living by frequenting the public resorts of men3 to forbid these1 then1 from going forth to their work1 is equivalent to forbidding them to eat during seven days4 ,why then should ,israel be bound by these laws1 which even1 according to the confession of the rabbies1 have no ,divine authority1 and are now only oppressive to the poor8 ,but it is not merely of inconsideration for the poor that the oral law is guilty3 we have more than once remarked the proud contempt with which it treats the poor and the unlearned1 and are sorry to find it even in the laws concerning the last sad offices to humanity3-- 1 1 8,if there be two persons dead in a city at once1 he that died first1 is first to be carried forth to burial1 and then the second4 ,but if one of them be a wise man1 and the other the disciple of a wise man1 the wise man is to have the precedency4 ,if one be the disciple of a wise man and the other an unlearned one 7amhaaretz71 the disciple of the wise man is to be carried forth first40 7,joreh ,deah1 #ced47 ,we do not here object to the practical result1 but to the spirit of the law4 ,god has ordained different ranks and grades of society1 and wills1 therefore1 that honour should be given to whom honour is due1 and the common course of the world brings men and things to their level4 ,but the doctors of the oral law were determined not to leave their posthumous honour to the natural course of events1 but whilst they lived1 took the matter into their own hands1 and decreed that the honour paid them in life should also be rendered to their poor bodies after death2 and that no plebeian or unlearned person should take precedency1 even in the last sad memento of human frailty4 ,after death there is but little difference between the learned and the unlearned1 and the real difference is made1 not by their previous learning or ignorance1 but by their moral worth4 ,an unlearned man may be1 and often is1 far more beloved by man1 and far more pleasing in the sight of ,god1 than the most learned1 and therefore1 when death has destroyed the imaginary distinctions of time1 if religion makes any difference between the dead1 it surely ought to make it according to that estimate1 which is eternal4 ,but the religion of the oral law cannot forget worldly distinction1 even in the solemn moment of death1 and therefore commands1 that as the unlearned man1 no matter what his moral worth may have been1 has been despised in his life1 he should still bear the marks of dishonour even in his death and burial4 ,but the homage which the oral law pays to wealth and mere worldly distinction1 is still more apparent in its commands respecting the measure of lamentation to be dealt out to the deceased4 ,it says1 on this subject-- 1 8,the sons of the rich are to be regarded as the sons of the wise men2 and the sons of the wise men as the sons of kings1 with regard to praising their deeds40 7,ibid41 #cdd47 ,here there is no concealment4 ,the learned makers of the oral law choose to have their children honoured with the honours of royalty1 and show that1 however highly they might prize their learning1 they had a due estimate of the value of wealth2 and that however they might despise the unlearned1 their contempt might be moderated1 if the object of it was only rich4 ,in the world we are not astonished at the inordinate homage paid to wealth1 but when the teachers of religion bow down before the golden idol1 and assign to mere wealth an honour which they refuse to the piety and moral worth of the poor1 we cannot help doubting the purity of their professed principles1 and questioning the truth of their religious system4 ,the main object of religion should be to raise men above the delusive appearances of this present world--to teach men to look beyond the distinctions of rank1 and wealth1 and learning1 to that eternal distinction which the righteous ,judge will make according to man's deeds4 ,and if there be one season more than another where religion ought to disregard the principles and customs of the world1 it is with respect to the hour of death and burial4 ,but here the oral law still maintains its love for wealth and worldly distinction1 and its haughty contempt for ignorance1 poverty1 and humbleness of station4 ,if any additional proof is still necessary1 it is found in the forms prescribed on the death of slaves3-- 8,in the case of male and female slaves1 the people are not to stand in a row1 nor to say the benediction of the mourners1 nor the consolations of the mourners2 but1 as one says1 to a man whose ox or ass is dead1 ,god replace your loss1 so one is to say1 in the case of a male or female slave who has died40 7,ibid41 #cgg47 ,volumes could not so clearly set forth the genius of ,judaism1 and the spirit of its authors1 as this one short law4 ,it exhibits the founders of ,judaism1 not only as void of all true religious sentiment1 but absolutely dead to all the natural feelings of humanity4 ,if mourners of any description require sympathy and respect1 surely they are the mourning family of a slave1 for1 excepting crime1 there is not anything that can aggravate the bitterness of death more than slavery4 ,here religion should pour in its oil and wine1 and as it alleviated the miseries of life1 diminish from the pangs of death4 ,at such an hour1 religion should assert the liberty of the soul1 and remind the children of pride1 that in the life after death the distinction of master and slave is unknown2 that there eternal and spiritual liberty awaits all the children of ,god1 whatever their outward condition here4 ,at such an hour1 religion should especially console the survivors with the hope1 that there is another and better state of existence1 where the slave and the freeman are equally regarded1 and dealt with according to one eternal rule of justice4 ,but the religion of the oral law1 on the contrary1 carries the degradation of slavery even down to the grave1 and helps it to survive the period of bondage4 ,it ordains that the usual religious rites should not be observed1 and places the slave on the same level with the brute that perisheth4 ,it prescribes no consolation for the slave's afflicted family1 but ordains that his master should receive the same words of comfort1 as if he had lost an ox or ass4 ,the death of the slave is looked upon as nothing2 it is only for the slave-owner's loss that the oral law has any consideration4 ,the fact of his having been a human being1 an inheritor of ,god's image1 and an heir of everlasting life1 is entirely overlooked by the rabbies4 ,he was a slave1 and they think1 therefore1 that as he was treated like a beast whilst he lived1 he may be buried like a beast now that he is dead4 ,if these slaves had been ,gentiles1 it would not have been surprising that the oral law should treat them with such little ceremony4 ,but we must remember that all such slaves were compelled to become proselytes to ,judaism4 ,they were1 therefore1 co-religionists with their masters2 but even this could not procure them the respect due to human beings4 ,because the providence of ,god had made them slaves1 the oral law endeavoured to turn them into beasts4 ,we are sure that many ,jews of the present day will revolt with horror from such a doctrine2 and acknowledge that it is a libel upon religion4 ,they will be ready to confess1 that the poor slave is a fellow-creature1 and an expectant of life eternal2 but let such persons stop to consider whence they have derived these sentiments1 so much more just1 more merciful1 and more worthy of religion1 than those expressed in the oral law4 ,that they have not derived them from ,judaism is clear4 ,may they not1 then1 be indebted for them to the influence and atmosphere of ,christianity in which they live8 ,certain it is1 that the ,new ,testament contains very different principles1 respecting the treatment of slaves1 from those which we have discovered in the oral law4 ,but1 further1 would it not be well for those who disapprove these rabbinic principles1 to ask themselves why they profess the rabbinic religion8 ,if it be true that a slave is something better than an ox or an ass1 ,judaism1 which classes them altogether1 must be false3 and the men who made such laws1 must be confessed to be very unfit teachers of religion4 ,nay more1 ,judaism must be acknowledged as a religion most unfit to promote the happiness of the human race4 ,if ,judaism should prevail again1 and1 as its advocates expect1 prevail universally1 slavery would also prevail in the same degree3 slaves would again be compelled to become proselytes1 and again be treated as beasts4 ,such is the great consummation1 the regeneration that ,judaism promises the world4 ,we therefore ask every ,jewish reader1 ,whether he can pray for such a state of things1 and whether he wishes to be thus enabled to degrade and trample upon his fellow-sinners8 ,if he does not1 there must be something wrong in the religious system which he professes--and if he only detects this one error1 or acknowledges only this one falsehood respecting the classification of slaves with oxen and asses1 it is sufficient to shake the whole rabbinic fabric3 and if he has any concern for the honour of the ,jewish nation1 he will endeavour to deliver them from such a foul imputation upon their mercy and their humanity4 ,but there is one point more in these laws respecting mourners1 which it is necessary to notice4 ,the oral law forbids the mourner1 as we have seen above1 to read in the words of the law for seven days3-- 1 8,the mourner is forbidden to read in the law1 the prophets1 and the ,hagiographa3 it is also forbidden to study in the ,mishna1 ,talmud1 ,constitutions1 and ,agadoth40 ,that a mourner would have no great loss in not being allowed to study in the oral law1 we can readily believe2 but why should he be prohibited from going to the great fountain of consolation--the revealed ,word of ,god8 ,if there be one season of life more fit than another for studying the ,word of ,god1 surely it is when death has entered a family1 and reminded all its inmates that the wages of sin is death4 ,if a husband or wife be left to mourn over the bereavement of a beloved partner1 what consolation can be equal to that which they find in ,god's promise of a world where there is neither sorrow nor death1 and where those who meet shall never part again8 ,if children be left to mourn over the removal of their parents1 whither should they flee for consolation rather than to that ,word which tells them of him who is the father of the fatherless8 ,every reasonable person will think also that1 when the heart is softened by the paternal chastisement1 then is a peculiarly appropriate season for learning his precepts and taking heed to his exhortations--and yet the oral law1 with a sort of most perverse ingenuity1 has just selected that period of human life1 in which the consolations of ,god's ,word are most necessary and its instruction likely to be of most use1 to forbid the reading of it altogether4 ,and here1 the rabbies have not scrupled to set aside the plain command of ,god4 ,god says of his law1 8,thou shalt meditate therein day and night and makes no exception for the seven days of mourning for the dead40 ,in describing the character of the righteous he says1 8,his delight is in the law of the ,lord1 and in his law doth he meditate day and night and pronounces a blessing upon such a character40 ,but the rabbies1 in contempt both of the command and of the promised blessing1 forbid the already afflicted mourner to obey the command and to seek the blessing4 ,even when the scribes and rabbies were in the plenitude of their power as civil magistrates in the land of ,israel1 obedience to such a command would have been unlawful1 as implying disobedience to the command of ,god4 ,the law of ,god and the law of man are here plainly in collision2 the former commanding ,israel to study in his law day and night2 the latter prohibiting all study for the seven days of the mourning2 but whenever these two authorities are opposed1 no rational being can doubt that it is ,israel's duty to obey ,god rather than man4 ,but1 in the present day1 when the oral law is not the law of the land1 when1 therefore1 the ordinances of the scribes have no authority whatever1 it is impossible to conceive why ,israel should obey this prohibition1 unless they wish1 by some public act1 to exhibit their determination to transgress the laws or ,god4 ,every one who abstains from the study of ,god's ,word for seven days1 plainly disobeys the ,divine command as given by ,moses and the prophets2 how then can the ,jews of the present day deceive themselves by supposing that they have the religion of ,moses8 ,the main difference between ,heathenism and the religion of ,moses is1 that the latter gives a revelation of ,god's will to guide us in difficulty and to comfort us in affliction4 ,the main difference between a ,heathen and a ,jewish mourner ought to be1 that the ,jew flees for consolation to ,god and his ,word1 whilst the ,heathen indulges in sorrow as those that have no hope4 ,the oral law1 however1 breaks down with this distinction1 and reduces the ,jew to the level of the ,heathen1 by robbing him in his hour of need of ,god's promises1 and commanding him to abstain for seven days from all study of ,god's ,word4 ,these laws respecting mourning1 then1 as being oppressive to the poor1 insulting to the unlearned1 degrading to humanity1 and contrary to the express precepts of the ,divine law1 have no intrinsic merit to commend them to ,israel1 and no claim upon their obedience4 ,no4 ,,lvi4 ,,dispensation ,,from ,,an ,,oath4 ,a religion which is plainly contrary to any of the ,divine attributes1 must necessarily be false4 ,for instance1 ,god is a holy ,god3 a religion1 therefore1 which would promote unholiness could not have the ,holy ,one of ,israel for its author4 ,god is also a merciful and a just ,god3 a religion1 therefore1 which is characterized by cruelty or injustice1 cannot proceed from him2 and for this reason1 amongst others1 we believe that the religion of the oral law cannot be that true religion which ,god gave to ,moses and the prophets4 ,the oral law is most unjust in its laws respecting ,gentiles1 slaves1 and unlearned men1 and most unmerciful in very many of its enactments4 ,but if there be one attribute more than another1 which is distinctive of the true ,god1 it is truth4 ,in the prophecies of ,jeremiah1 ,he is even identified with truth1 as it is said3-- 8,the ,lord ,god is ,truth40 7,jer4 x4 #aj47 ,and in that prediction1 which he put into the mouth of ,balaam1 he says1 that it is by this attribute that he is distinguished from the sons of men4 8,god is not a man that he should lie2 neither the son of man that he should repent3 hath he said1 and shall he not do it8 or hath he spoken1 and shall he not make it good80 7,numbers xxiii4 #ai47 ,men may be wicked enough to promise what they do not intend to perform1 or after promising1 may change their mind1 and refuse to fulfil their engagements2 but ,god is too holy to deceive wilfully1 or to alter what has proceeded out of his mouth4 ,a religion1 therefore1 which in any wise tends to lessen our reverence for truth1 or encourages men to alter a solemn engagement1 or1 what is still worse1 teaches how to absolve from oaths1 cannot proceed from the ,god of truth2 and this is what the oral law does in certain cases4 ,we do not mean to accuse it of teaching1 as the religion of ,rome does1 that dispensation may be had from every kind of oath4 ,on the contrary1 the rabbies assume the power of dispensation only in the case of 1 8rash oaths20 but we mean to assert1 that even that assumption is contrary to the ,word of ,god1 and injurious to the cause of truth2 and1 therefore1 sufficient to overthrow the credit of the oral law as a religion given by ,god4 ,the doctrine itself is as follows3-- 1 1 1 1 8,if any man swear a rash oath1 and afterwards repent of it1 because he sees that if he keep this oath it will cause him grief1 and therefore changes his mind2 or if something should occur to him which was not in his mind at the time when he swore1 and he repent on that account2 behold1 a person1 in such circumstances1 is to ask one wise man 7rabbi71 or three common men in any place where there is not a wise man1 and they absolve him from his oath2 and then it will be lawful to do a thing which he had sworn not to do1 or to leave undone a thing which he had sworn to do3 and this is what is called absolution from oaths4 ,this matter has no foundation whatever in the written law1 but it has been learned from ,moses1 our master1 by oral tradition1 that the ,scripture1 #8,he shall not profane his word1' 7,numbers xxx4 #c1 in the ,english ,bible #b17 means1 that a man shall not himself profane his word in a way of levity and with a contemptuous mind1 according as it is written1 #8,neither shalt thou profane the name of thy ,god' 7,levit4 xix4 #ab72 but if a man repent and change his mind1 a wise man is to absolve him40 7,hilchoth ,sh'vuoth1 c4 vi4 #a1 #b47 ,here it is plainly taught1 that if a man has reason to fear any personal inconvenience1 or even if he changes his mind1 he may escape from the most solemn obligation that can be laid upon the consciences of men2 and that1 after appealing to ,god in confirmation of his declaration to do or to leave undone some particular action1 one or more of his fellow-sinners can remit his duty to his ,creator1 and give him a license to do the very contrary of that which he had promised before and unto ,god1 that he would do4 ,now let every ,israelite reader first consult his own reason1 and reflect whether this doctrine is agreeable to the character of ,god1 as set forth in the ,scripture4 ,the ,god of the ,bible is a ,god of eternal and immutable truth4 ,one of his peculiar characteristics1 that he keepeth covenant and mercy4 ,a man1 therefore1 who breaks his word1 and still more so1 a man who breaks an oath1 is unlike ,god4 ,is it probable1 then1 that ,god would give a religion with a special provision for making men unlike himself8 ,again1 ,god is a ,god of knowledge1 and therefore knows that the children of men are in a great degree the children of habit2 he knows also that by habit the evil propensities are strengthened1 and that there is in men a strong propensity to shrink from their word1 if it cause any trouble or damage3 is it likely1 then1 that ,god would give a law directly tending to strengthen that evil propensity by forming a habit of breaking one's word1 even under the solemn circumstances of an oath8 ,reason decides that such a law cannot proceed from the ,god of ,israel4 ,has it then any support in the written ,word of ,god8 ,it would be strange1 indeed1 if the ,word of ,god should contain anything contrary to reason4 ,as revealing the nature of ,him who is incomprehensible1 it may contain things above our reason3 but that in giving laws for man it should give him license to do what his reason tells him is directly opposed to the character of ,god1 is altogether incredible4 ,the rabbies1 themselves1 however1 do not endeavour to justify the doctrine by a reference to ,scripture4 ,they say in plain terms1 8,this matter has no foundation whatever in the written law10 and thus acknowledge that it is altogether a matter of tradition1 the argument against it1 therefore1 becomes doubly strong4 ,every one knows1 that a story loses nothing by passing through many mouths1 but that in the course of its progress it gets so many additions1 and undergoes so many changes as at last to be scarcely recognisable4 ,this circumstance makes all oral tradition uncertain and unsatisfactory1 but is particularly suspicious when it appears1 not only opposed to the ,scripture character of ,god1 but also favourable to the evil propensities of man4 ,if it had exacted a more scrupulous regard to truth and a willing submission to hardship and inconvenience for the sake of truth1 then1 as opposing the principles of self-interest1 it would have been less suspicious2 but when it actually tells men that to do what may save them from worldly trouble or personal disadvantage is a ,divine institution1 one cannot help suspecting that it is an invention of men1 who found it convenient occasionally to escape from the obligation of an oath4 ,but after all1 the great arbiter must be the written ,word of ,god4 ,the rabbies say1 ,that it has been learned from ,moses by oral tradition1 that the words1 8,he shall not profane his word10 mean that a man shall not himself profane his word in a way of levity1 but that he shall go to a wise man and get absolution2 let us then read the whole verse from which those words are taken3-- 8,if a man vow a vow unto the ,lord1 or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond1 he shall not break his word1 he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth40 ,now let any man of common sense and honesty say1 whether if it had been ,god's intention to forbid all absolution from oaths1 ,he could have employed words more to the purpose than these2 or whether the plain simple grammatical meaning is not directly opposed to the rabbinic doctrine8 ,god says1 ,if a man swear1 he shall not profane his word4 ,the rabbies say1 he may profane his word4 ,to prevent all mistake1 ,god further adds1 8,he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth40 ,the rabbies say1 he need not do what proceeds out of his mouth2 and yet they have the face to tell us1 that their doctrine is from ,moses1 and is the traditional interpretation of words which signify the very reverse of what they say4 ,it is only wonderful that they should have referred to this verse at all1 and the fact can only be accounted for by the supposition that this verse was too plain to be got over1 and therefore they thought it best to take the bull by the horns1 by selecting this very verse as the basis of their interpretation4 ,that this verse in its grammatical construction is directly opposed to the oral law no one can doubt1 for it forbids what the rabbies allow1 and commands what the rabbies forbid4 ,but the opposition is not found in this verse only4 ,the other verse to which the rabbies also allude is equally plain against it4 ,the words1 8,ye shall not swear by my name falsely1 neither shalt thou profane the name of thy ,god4 ,i am the ,,lord10 plainly forbid that absolution from oaths which the rabbies teach not only as lawful1 but as of ,divine authority4 ,we know that the rabbies make a distinction between a false oath and a rash oath2 but the distinction1 as made by them is unfounded4 ,a rash oath1 according to their doctrine1 is an oath concerning something which it is possible and lawful for a man to do or to leave undone2 for as soon as it interferes with the fulfilment of a ,divine command1 it belongs to that class of oaths which they call vain oaths4 ,if1 therefore1 a man swears to do what is both lawful and possible for him to do1 and afterwards draws back and does it not1 what man in his senses can doubt1 that that individual1 no matter what the pretext for not keeping the oath1 is guilty of having sworn falsely8 ,what is it to swear falsely1 if voluntarily to refuse to do what a man had previously sworn to do1 constitute not that sin8 ,a sinful falsehood is a wilful departure from truth2 here there is that wilful departure3 who1 then1 will dare to affirm1 that such conduct is not contrary to the express command of ,god8 ,rabbinists sometimes say1 that though the oral law sometimes commands more than is commanded in the ,scriptures1 it never allows what ,god has forbidden2 but here we have a plain example of the contrary4 ,here the oral law allows false swearing1 which ,god has positively forbidden4 ,the doctrine of absolution from oaths teaches men to transgress three negative precepts4 ,the man who swears to do anything and then does it not1 because he has got absolution1 violates1 first1 the negative precept1 8,he shall not profane his word20 he violates1 secondly1 the negative precept1 8,ye shall not swear by my name falsely20 and1 lastly1 he violates a negative precept more important than either of the others2 and that is1 8,neither shalt thou profane the name of thy ,god40 ,any man1 pretending to religion1 who should act upon these principles1 first swear and then obtain absolution from his oath1 would expose his religion to the contempt and indignation of all honest men1 and thereby do all that in him lies to profane the name of his ,god4 ,let1 then1 every ,israelite who thinks that the negative precepts are more important than the affirmative1 remember1 that in this one instance the oral law teaches him to violate three such precepts2 and let him reflect further1 that the upholding such a law as this is to profane the name of the ,god of ,israel before those who are ignorant of the ,scripture4 ,but the rabbinical doctrine does not stop at prospective absolution1 it goes so far as to absolve from the guilt of perjury actually committed3-- 1 1 1 1 1 8,if a man swear a rash oath concerning the future1 but lies in that which he has sworn1 as1 if he should swear not to eat this bread1 and afterwards should eat it2 and if1 after he has eaten it1 before he brings his sacrifice1 in case he did it ignorantly1 or before he is flogged1 in case he did it presumptuously--he repent and ask a wise man1 and he absolve him1 behold such an one is exempt from the sacrifice or from the flogging3 and not only so1 but if they had actually bound him in order to flog him1 and he ask a wise man1 and he absolve him before the flogging has commenced1 he is exempt40 7,ibid4 #ah47 ,in this rabbinic decision there are two cases1 and both contrary to the ,word of ,god4 ,first1 we have the case of the man who has broken his oath ignorantly1 and respecting whom ,god has decided in the following words3 8,if a soul swear1 pronouncing with his lips to do evil1 or to do good1 whatsoever it be that a man shall pronounce with an oath1 and it be hid from him2 when he knoweth of it1 then he shall be guilty in one of these4 ,and it shall be1 when he shall be guilty in one of these things1 that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing3 and he shall bring his trespass-offering unto the ,lord for his sin which he hath sinned10 c4 7,levit4 v4 #d1 c47 ,here ,god positively commands1 first1 that he should confess his sin1 and secondly1 that he should bring a sacrifice in order to obtain forgiveness2 and1 by the above law1 the rabbies as positively declare that obedience to these commands is superfluous4 ,a man need only say that he has changed his mind1 and get a rabbi to absolve him1 and then he can set the ,word of ,god at defiance1 he need neither confess his sin1 nor bring the sacrifice4 ,how can the men who profess such a religion pretend to have any regard for the law of ,moses1 or how can they with any consistency reproach ,christians with the non-observance of the ceremonial precepts1 when they themselves profess religious principles which unceremoniously subvert such plain commands8 ,the second case is1 however1 far more flagrant4 ,it supposes a man to have sworn that he would not do a certain thing1 but afterwards wilfully to have done it--that is1 it supposes a man to have been guilty of wilful perjury1 and yet declares that he may be delivered both from the guilt and the punishment1 by going to a rabbi and getting absolution4 ,this oral law1 which would flog a poor starving creature for eating ,gentile food1 or meat and milk together1 devises an expedient for delivering him who is guilty of the grave crime of perjury--that is1 though cruel to the poor1 it is merciful to the criminal4 ,if this be not to violate the laws of ,god with a high hand1 then we know not what sin is4 ,here both classes of the precepts1 negative and affirmative1 are treated with the same contempt2 both equally trampled under foot4 ,the guilty are absolved1 not only from doing what ,god commands1 but from the penalty of actual transgression4 ,the rabbies presume not only to absolve a man from doing what he has sworn to do1 but also to turn perjury actually committed into innocence4 ,they have assumed the high prerogative of ,god1 have abrogated his laws1 and taught the guilty to set his threatenings at defiance4 ,we verily believe that the mass of the ,jewish people have been ignorant of this gross contempt for the ,mosaic law1 or they could never have continued so long in such a system1 nor so long have suffered the name of ,god to be profaned by the attempt to pass off such a religion as proceeding from ,him4 ,now1 then1 we call on every reader of this paper to decide whether the oral law can really be from ,god8 ,has this doctrine of absolution from oaths anything resembling the character of the ,divine ,being as a ,god of truth8 ,is it possible that ,god should give an oral law directly subversive of that which he has given in writing2 or will any one dare to say that the ,almighty1 when he wished to give a law permitting absolution from oaths1 knew so little of the ,hebrew language as to enunciate it in words which directly forbid it8 ,let no one misunderstand us1 as if we applied the passages quoted from the oral law generally to the case of all oaths1 or as if we attributed this doctrine of the oral law to all ,israel4 ,we do neither the one nor the other2 in a future number we hope to consider the case of an oath between man and man1 and at present our only intention is to show that the oral law is dishonouring to ,god1 subversive of the commands given by ,moses1 and injurious to the best interests of the ,jewish people2 nay1 that it is actually a libel on the children of ,abraham2 and that1 therefore1 if they have any love to ,god1 any reverence for ,moses1 and any respect for themselves and their brethren1 they are bound publicly to renounce the principles which it inculcates1 and by which they have been deluded for so many centuries4 ,it is possible to do one of two things--either to approve the doctrine of absolution from oaths1 or to disapprove of it4 ,those who approve of it will1 of course1 endeavour to uphold it1 and will thereby continue the profanation of ,god's name2 and1 so far as they can1 stamp dishonour upon the religion of ,israel4 ,those1 who disapprove the idea of a rabbi's absolving from a solemn oath1 and think that oaths are not to be tampered with1 are bound not only to protest against this particular abuse1 but to reject the whole oral law4 ,the rabbies declare that this doctrine is not an ordinance of the scribes1 but an oral tradition from ,moses2 if then it be false1 the rabbies are again convicted of passing off an invention of their own as an ordinance of ,god1 and are therefore wholly unworthy of credit4 ,the oral law depends altogether upon the validity of the testimony1 and if the witnesses can be proved1 in any one instance1 to have spoken falsehood1 the credit of the whole is destroyed4 ,now this is eminently the case1 for not only have they said what is false1 but have endeavoured to establish a principle subversive of all reverence for truth4 ,it would be difficult for any man1 who was known as one in the habit of getting dispensation from oaths1 to find belief or credit in the world1 and he would scarcely be admitted as a valid witness in a court of justice2 but the man who propounds dispensation from oaths as a religious doctrine1 and teaches it systematically as agreeable to the will of ,god1 is a more suspicious person still1 and such are the authors of the oral law4 ,the former might be regarded as a deluded person1 who only broke his oaths when he got dispensation1 but the latter would be considered an artful underminer of principle1 and a wilful despiser of truth2 his testimony would1 therefore1 have no weight4 ,now1 it is upon the testimony of such persons that the authority of the oral law entirely depends4 ,it is confessed1 that until the ,mishna and ,gemara were compiled1 there was no written record of its contents1 but that it was propagated from mouth to mouth4 ,if1 therefore1 it appear that those who transmitted it were men whose love for truth was equivocal1 we cannot be sure that they did not transmit a forgery4 ,the doctrine1 which we have just considered1 shows that they did not love truth1 and that they have actually libelled the memory of ,moses1 the servant of ,god1 by asserting that he taught them how to get absolution from oaths4 ,it is for the ,jews to consider whether they will still be deluded by such incompetent witnesses1 and still1 even silently1 uphold a doctrine so dishonouring to their religion4 ,no4 ,,lvii4 ,,doctrine ,,of ,,oaths1 ,,continued4 ,every one naturally thinks that his own religion is the true one4 ,the ,mussulman thinks thus of ,mahometanism1 the ,christian of ,christianity1 and the ,jew of ,judaism1 and yet it is plain that they cannot all be right--two out of the three must necessarily be in error4 ,what then is to be done8 ,are they all to go on in listless and lazy indifference1 and leave it to another world to find out whether or not they have been in the right1 or are we to lay it down as a maxim that every one is to continue in that religion in which he was born1 whether right or wrong1 and that therefore the ,turk is to remain a ,mahometan1 and the ,hindoo an idolater1 to his life's end8 ,there are very many in the world who seem to think so1 and who adhere to a religion simply because it was the religion of their forefathers4 ,now we grant that no man should carelessly or lightly abandon the religion of his childhood1 and have no scruple in saying that he who changes his religion as he would his clothes must be a fool1 or something worse4 ,but we must say1 at the same time1 that he who retains his religion1 merely as a matter of prejudice or interest1 is not a great deal better1 and can hardly be considered as a rational being4 ,every being1 whom the ,creator has endowed with reason1 ought to have a religion and to know why he prefers it to all others4 ,but perhaps some reader will say1 ,i have a religion--,i am a ,jew1 and ,i prefer this religion to all others1 because ,god himself gave it to ,moses on ,mount ,sinai4 ,to this we reply1 ,but how do you know that you have got the religion of ,moses8 ,if you really had ,moses' religion you could not be wrong1 but how can you prove that the religion which you now profess is really that true religion8 ,your fathers in the times of old often forsook ,moses and the ,prophets1 and taught their children a false religion1 how1 then1 can you be sure that this is not the case with what you have got at present8 ,certainty can be had only by examination and comparison4 ,the ,judaism of the present day must be compared with the ,law and the ,prophets4 ,if it agrees with them1 then the ,jews have reason to believe that they are in the right2 but if not1 then they must be in the wrong4 ,our own firm conviction is1 that modern ,judaism is altogether spurious1 and plainly opposed to that religion which ,god gave to your fathers4 ,the doctrine of dispensation from oaths is sufficient to prove this1 as was shown in the last number4 ,but we have more objections still to make against that doctrine1 and all confirmatory of the conclusion to which we have come4 ,we saw in our last1 that if a man swear an oath to himself only1 where others are not concerned1 he can have absolution1 but we now come to consider the case of an oath1 made to another person1 respecting which the oral law teaches us as follows3-- 1 8,if ,reuben should adjure ,simeon1 and he answer ,amen1 or accept the oath2 and afterwards ,simeon should repent of his oath1 and ask concerning it1 he is not to be absolved except in the presence of ,reuben who adjured him4 ,in like manner1 if ,reuben should swear an oath not to receive any profit from ,simeon1 or that ,simeon should receive no profit from him1 and afterwards should repent and ask a wise man1 he is not to be absolved except in the presence of ,simeon1 concerning whose profit he had vowed3 yea1 even though ,simeon were an infant or a ,gentile1 he is not to be absolved except in his presence1 in order that he1 with respect to whom the vow was made1 may know that the other has got absolution from his oath or vow1 and that therefore he may receive from or confer profit upon him40 7,hilchoth ,sh'vuoth1 c4 vi4 #g47 ,now in considering this doctrine1 we must not withhold that measure of approbation which is due to the rabbies4 ,there is here a certain degree of honesty and plain dealing4 ,the rabbies have determined that where one man swears to another1 he is not to be absolved1 except in the presence of that other1 and are in so far vastly superior in morality to those who hold and teach1 not only that all oaths may be absolved1 but that they may be absolved secretly1 so that he who is most affected by the dispensation1 knows nothing about it4 ,bad as the oral law is1 it does not descend to such a depth of hypocrisy and profaneness4 ,another trait which deserves notice is1 that it does not teach that no faith is to be kept towards those who have got another religion1 but expressly determines1 that if a ,jew swear to a ,gentile1 he is not to be absolved without that ,gentile's knowledge4 ,we readily admit that this is greatly superior to a doctrine of dispensation1 taught and practised by some who call themselves ,christians2 but1 having made this admission1 and given the rabbies their due1 ,we must also say1 that the doctrine of absolution here taught is plainly contrary to reason and ,scripture1 and if extensively practised1 would destroy all confidential intercourse or dealings between man and man4 ,just suppose that the law of this country was1 that any one who had entered into a solemn engagement with another1 could be enabled to break it1 simply1 by calling up the person to whom he had mode the promise before a magistrate1 and by declaring1 in his presence1 that he repented of what he had done1 who would ever trust another1 or value even an oath8 ,not only would the commercial transactions of the country be at an end1 but the very bonds of society would be rent asunder4 ,the existence of human society depends upon that measure of confidence which a man can place in his brother1 but if the rabbinical doctrine prevailed and were acted upon1 there could be no confidence more4 ,a man's oath would be good for nothing1 and if so1 the value of his word still less4 ,but1 besides this1 the doctrine that a rabbi may absolve ,simeon from his sworn obligation to ,reuben1 is absurd4 ,if ,simeon swear to ,reuben a lawful oath1 no one on earth but ,reuben can release him2 but here we are told that a rabbi1 who has nothing at all to do with the matter1 may remit the obligation4 ,he might1 with as much reason and with less profanity1 undertake to absolve ,simeon from his pecuniary debts4 ,that the dispensation must take place in the presence of the party to whom ,simeon swore1 is but poor satisfaction1 and would not remove the inconvenience1 nor diminish the guilt4 ,suppose1 for instance1 that ,simeon should promise ,reuben with an oath1 that within a given time he would complete certain business1 or lend him a certain sum of money1 or anything else of the kind1 and that ,reuben should arrange his affairs in dependence upon this oath1 what satisfaction would it be to ,reuben to be present at the absolution6 ,it would not remove the inconvenience nor indemnify him for the loss to which the non-fulfilment of the oath exposed him1 nor abate the vexation and sorrow which he must feel to see a teacher of religion trampling upon the most solemn sanction with which religion guards the intercourse between man and man4 ,for1 after all1 the main objection to the doctrine is1 that it allows what ,god forbids1 as we showed in the last number1 and under the pretence of religion1 makes perjury systematic4 ,but to estimate this doctrine fully1 and also the character of the men with whom it originated1 we must look at the original passage in the ,talmud1 on which the above-cited decision is founded3-- 8,he that has a vow upon him1 with respect to profit from his neighbour1 is not to be absolved1 except in that neighbour's presence4 ,how is this proved8 ,rav ,nachman says1 it is proved by the words1 #8,and the ,lord said unto ,moses1 in ,midian1 ,go return into ,egypt2 for all the men are dead which sought thy life2' he said to him1 ,in ,midian thou hast vowed1 go and get absolution from thy vow in ,midian1 for it is written1 1 #8,and ,moses was content4' 7,exodus ii4 #ba47 ,now this word means nothing else but swearing1 as it is written1 #8,and he took an oath of him4' 7,ezek4 xvii4 #ac47 ,it is farther proved by the words1 #8,and he also rebelled against ,king ,nebuchadnezzar1 who had made him swear by ,god4' 7#b ,chron4 xxxvi4 #ac47 ,what was the nature of his rebellion8 ,zedekiah found ,nebuchadnezzar eating a live hare1 whereupon ,nebuchadnezzar said to him1 swear to me not to reveal this1 nor to report the matter4 ,zedekiah swore1 but afterwards he was grieved1 and went and got his oath absolved and told4 ,nebuchadnezzar heard that they despised him1 and sent and fetched the ,sanhedrin and ,zedekiah1 and said to them1 ,ye see what ,zedekiah has done1 although he swore by the name of ,god not to reveal the matter4 ,they said to him1 ,he got a dispensation from his oath4 ,he said1 ,is it lawful1 then1 to get dispensation from an oath8 ,they said1 ,yes4 ,he said again1 ,is this to be done in the other's presence or absence8 ,they say1 ,in his presence10 c4 7,nedarim1 fol4 lxv4 #a47 ,now this passage not only illustrates the doctrine of dispensation1 but throws much light upon the character and knowledge of the men from whom the tradition is derived4 ,in the first place1 it shows a strange confusion of mind to derive 1 8he was willing10 from 1 8he sware20 but it is stranger still out of this mistranslation1 to invent a story of ,moses having sworn and got absolution2 but the most strange of all is1 that any one should be found who can believe this a sufficient warrant for the doctrine of dispensation from an oath made to a fellow-creature4 ,if even it were true1 as the rabbies say1 that ,moses had sworn to ,jethro not to return into ,egypt1 still this is not a case in point2 for ,moses did not get absolution from any third person1 but received express permission from ,jethro himself to return1 as we find in the chapter referred to1 where it is said1 8,and ,moses went and returned to ,jethro1 his father-in-law1 and said unto him1 ,let me go1 ,i pray thee1 and return unto my brethren which are in ,egypt1 and see whether they be yet alive4 ,and ,jethro said to ,moses1 ,go in peace40 7,exod4 iv4 #ah47 ,if there was any oath1 we see that it was dispensed with1 not by a wise man1 nor by any third person or persons1 but by him to whom the oath was made4 ,this passage is1 therefore1 decidedly against the rabbinic doctrine1 and therefore the rabbinic doctrine cannot be true4 ,the second case cited by the ,talmud is still stronger1 as a testimony1 both against the system and the men4 ,it tells us that ,zedekiah swore to ,nebuchadnezzar not to betray him in a certain matter1 which no law1 either of ,god or man1 compelled him to divulge--that he swore by the name of the ,god of ,israel1 and yet that1 after this most solemn transaction1 he did what he had sworn not to do4 ,he betrayed a man from whom he had received kindness1 and equally disregarded the obligations of gratitude and the sacred ties of an oath--in short1 that he committed perjury4 ,this is in itself bad enough2 but the ,talmud proceeds further to tell us1 that this was not his own individual act1 but the solemn decision of the ,supreme ,council of the ,sanhedrin4 ,zedekiah did not perjure himself without having advice4 ,he went to the ,sanhedrin1 and they absolved him from the obligation of the oath1 and that contrary to their own maxim1 that an oath sworn to a neighbour cannot be absorbed1 except in his presence4 ,here1 then1 the ,talmud plainly confesses that the ,sanhedrin did wrong1 in fact1 that they were aiders and abettors in ,zedekiah's perjury2 that1 therefore1 they were men who had no regard to truth1 and no fear of ,god2 and1 consequently1 that no man of any common sense would believe a single word that came out of their mouths4 ,what1 then1 becomes of the whole fabric of ,jewish tradition8 ,it depends altogether upon the unimpeachable character of the various ,sanhedrins through whose hands it passed4 ,if1 therefore1 we should1 find that any one ,sanhedrin consisted of notorious liars1 the genuineness of the oral law is at an end4 ,but here the ,talmud itself tells us that even before the deportation of ,zedekiah1 the ,sanhedrin consisted1 not of common liars1 but of false swearers1 of men who had so little regard for the name of the ,lord1 as to absolve a solemn oath of which that name was the safeguard4 ,if they had done this in accordance with their traditions1 there would be some appearance of consistency1 but they did it in the face of the tradition1 which says1 that when an oath is sworn to another person absolution cannot be given except in his presence4 ,when ,zedekiah demanded absolution1 they should have refused1 and told him that it was contrary to the oral law2 but1 whether from fear or from self-interest1 they acceded to the king's wish1 and helped hint to commit perjury3 and these are the men who have handed down the oral law2 what trust1 then1 can be placed in their word1 when they disregard an oath8 ,the story is either true or false4 ,if true1 then all the members of the ,sanhedrin were guilty of perjury1--if false1 then the ,talmud has handed down a falsehood as truth1 and in neither case is it worthy of credit4 ,surely it is time for the chosen people of ,god to use the reason which ,god has given1 and to examine the grounds upon which they profess ,judaism4 ,the ignorant and the thoughtless may retain their profession as a mere matter of prejudice1 but it would be very strange if any1 who think religion worth a thought1 should still adhere to a system for which there is not only no evidence1 but against which there is evidence so satisfactory4 ,according to the ,talmud itself1 and on its own showing1 the persons whose office it was to guard the traditions in the days of ,zedekiah were men who transgressed those traditions1 and made themselves guilty of perjury2 what warrant1 then1 have the ,jews for believing that those men did not change the traditions1 and hand down mere inventions of their own8 ,what was there to restrain them from such conduct1 if they could free themselves from the obligation of an oath by the name of the ,god of ,israel8 ,but as the men who handed down the traditions are described by their own successors as wicked and ungodly persons1 so the traditions which they have handed down are of the same character1 and1 as we have said1 if generally acted upon1 would rend asunder all the ties of human society1 and beget universal distrust and suspicion4 ,the oral law plainly and unequivocally allows a man to swear to his neighbour that he will do or leave undone something that his neighbour requires1 and then to get absolution from that oath and do the contrary4 ,it is true that it requires this to be done in the presence of the other person1 but that does not much alter the matter4 ,whether ,zedekiah divulged what he had sworn to ,nebuchadnezzar to keep secret1 in his presence or behind his back1 is a thing of very little consequence2 the oath is just as much and as really broken1 and the results might be just as pernicious and injurious4 ,take1 for example1 the case of a manufacturer who communicates to his servant some important secret in his trade1 and for his own security binds him by an oath not to divulge it4 ,in a little time1 the servant1 for some reason or other1 finds it convenient or profitable to make this secret known1 and goes to a wise man1 summons the manufacturer to be present1 gets absolution1 and then divulges what he had sworn to keep secret1--where is the difference as to all practical purposes1 or as to the actual guilt of perjury8 ,but again1 suppose that the wise man was to act as the ,sanhedrin did1 and absolve the man without summoning the person to whom he swore1 it is a question whether the servant would then he bound4 ,zedekiah evidently thought not4 ,all he was concerned about was to have absolution1 and if there was any sin in giving it1 he evidently thought that the onus rested upon those who gave1 and not upon him who received it4 ,according to the oral law1 the ,sanhedrin was wrong in giving absolution under the circumstances3 but1 according to the same oral law1 ,zedekiah was right in obeying their decision4 ,implicit and universal obedience to the words of the ,sanhedrin and wise men is required by the ,talmud2 and1 therefore1 if a wise man give absolution1 even though he give it unlawfully1 it is still the duty of him who is absolved to obey his decision1 and act upon it4 ,a ,rabbinist is not allowed to reason2 but as we have seen on a former occasion1 to believe that his right hand is his left1 and vice versa1 if the rabbies say so--and1 consequently1 if a wise man absolve him1 he is not to trouble either his conscience or his reason as to the right or the wrong2 his duty is not to dispute1 but to receive the determination as the words of the living ,god4 ,the provision1 therefore1 that if ,simeon swear to ,reuben he is not to be absolved1 except in ,reuben's presence1 affords but little protection4 ,if it was possible for the ,sanhedrin1 a body consisting of seventy-one persons1 to disregard it1 it is surely possible that any other wise man might disregard it also1 and absolve ,simeon1 even in ,reuben's absence4 ,now the bare possibility of such occurrences would make all promises1 whether sanctioned by oaths or not1 of no value1 and have the most pernicious effect as to the practice of speaking truth4 ,men might reason from the greater to the less1 and say1 ,if it be lawful1 by means of absolution1 to break an oath1 1 fortiori1 it is lawful to break one's word without absolution2 and1 at all events1 those to whom the promise was given would be likely to reason thus1 and say1 ,if we cannot depend upon this man's oath1 much less can we place confidence in his word4 ,but what is worse still1 such a doctrine is calculated to make men despise all religion1 and to render them a prey to infidelity4 ,the thoughtless and the rash are very likely to say1 ,if this be religion1 better far to be without it2 or1 to conclude that as such doctrine cannot possibly be the offspring of the ,divine mind1 all revealed religion is a mere imposture4 ,in every case it is a reproach to the good sense and piety of ,israel to profess such a doctrine2 or1 if they do not believe it1 to remain silent1 and suffer mankind to suppose that this is the religion of the children of ,abraham4 ,so long as they profess that the oral law is the source of their religion1 so long are they responsible for the doctrines which it teaches2 and so long as they abstain from a public renunciation of the oral law1 they must be considered as believers in its authority4 ,it will not do to renounce one particular doctrine1 whilst they profess faith in the general system4 ,the body of traditions is a whole which cannot be parted4 ,they have all come down1 resting on the same evidence2 if1 therefore1 the evidence be invalid in any one case1 it is invalid in all2 and if any one admits its validity in some cases1 he cannot1 if a reasonable man1 deny it in others4 ,he may dispute about the conflicting opinions of the rabbies1 but if he admit any one of those doctrines which are called traditions from ,sinai1 he must admit them all1 and1 consequently1 this which professes to be one of them4 ,it remains1 therefore1 for the ,israelites of the present day to choose1 whether they will still retain the system of the oral law1 and thereby sanction the dispensation from oaths1 or whether they will repudiate this doctrine1 and thereby renounce the whole oral law4 ,no4 ,,lviii4 ,,meritoriousness ,,of ,,circumcision4 ,wherever there is an internal principle of religion1 it will1 like all other principles1 manifest itself in external acts1 and in an external form of rites and ceremonies4 ,it is just as impossible for a living man to continue without giving any signs of life1 as for the religious principle to exist without an outward expression4 ,it is the universal law of creation that every vital principle should manifest itself and therefore1 when the ,creator himself was pleased to give a religion1 he ordained certain rites and ceremonies to give notice of its existence1 and to serve as the body in which the soul should reside4 ,rites and ceremonies1 therefore1 are not to be despised1 even when devised by man1 for they are demonstrations of an internal life from which they proceed2 but when instituted by ,god1 they are doubly important1 because besides being a sign1 they have all the authority of a ,divine command4 ,false religion1 however1 is not satisfied with this acknowledgment1 nor this measure of reverence4 ,it goes still further1 and elevates the external sign above the thing signified1 by making the external rites the great essentials of religion4 ,thus1 in the time of the ,prophet ,isaiah1 the ,israelites thought that the act of sacrifice1 and the external observation of the ,sabbath and holidays1 formed the substance of religion1 and therefore ,god told them1 that even these things1 though ordained by himself1 were not pleasing in his sight1 unless they proceeded from the living principle within4 8,bring no more vain oblations3 incense is an abomination unto me2 the new moons and ,sabbaths1 the calling of assemblies1 ,i cannot away with2 it is iniquity1 even the solemn meeting40 7,isaiah i4 #ac47 ,and again in a subsequent chapter he says1 8,they seek me daily1 and delight to know my ways1 as a nation that did righteousness and forsook not the ordinances of their ,god3 they ask of me the ordinances of justice2 they take delight in approaching to ,god40 7lviii4 #b47 ,and yet at the same time he shows that this was all mere outside work1 and displeasing in his sight4 ,wherever1 therefore1 we find a religion1 which places external observances above the moral duties1 we may be sure it is not of ,god2 and for this reason1 amongst others1 we believe that the oral law is the invention of men4 ,we had an instance in the subject last considered1 the dispensation from oaths4 ,the rabbies disregard the moral obligation1 but make the mere form of going to a rabbi to get absolution an essential requisite4 ,another proof is furnished by their doctrine concerning ,the meritoriousness of ,circumcision1 which is set forth as follows3-- 1 1 1 1 8,it is an affirmative precept1 binding on every man of ,israel1 to circumcise his son2 and this is greater than any of the other affirmative precepts1 for there is a threat of excision attached to it2 and further1 on account of it1 thirteen covenants were made1 as is recorded in the chapter of circumcision4 ,abraham was not called perfect until he was circumcised1 and by the merit of circumcision1 a covenant was made with him respecting the giving of the land4 ,it also delivers from the judgment of hell1 for the wise men have said1 that ,abraham our father sits at the door of hell1 and does not suffer any one that is circumcised to be cast into it4 ,uncircumcision is despised1 for the ,gentiles are reproached with it1 as it is said1 #8,all the nations are uncircumcised' 7,jer4 ix4 #be72 and every one who breaks the covenant of ,abraham our father1 either by not being circumcised or by becoming uncircumcised1 has no part in the world to come1 even though he possess a knowledge of the law and good works40 7,joreh ,deah41 #bfj47 ,here we have the very same misconception1 which ,god reproved by the mouth of ,isaiah2 an external act is preferred to holiness of life1 and a mere preparation of the body to purity of heart4 ,it is gravely and solemnly asserted that the precept concerning circumcision is greater than all the other affirmative precepts1 that is1 it is exalted above our duty to ,god and our duty to our neighbour4 ,the command 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself10 is an affirmative precept1 and is therefore one of those to which circumcision is preferred4 ,the command 8,honour thy father and thy mother10 is an affirmative precept1 and has a promise of long life in the land attached to it4 ,it concerns our duty to those1 to whom1 under ,god1 we owe our existence1 and yet the oral law teaches that obedience to it is not so important as to the precept concerning circumcision4 ,we do not mean to deny the scriptural importance of circumcision1 nor of any other of the ,divine institutions1 but we do mean to appeal to every ,israelite of understanding to judge1 which of these commandments is of most importance4 ,can an ,israelite1 merely because he is circumcised1 though he has no love to his fellow-men1 and no reverence for his parents1 be acceptable in the sight of ,god1 or can he be more acceptable than a ,gentile who obeys these commands8 ,but the sweeping declaration of the oral law1 not only teaches men that circumcision is more valuable than love to man1 but exalts it even above love to ,god4 ,the commandment1 8,thou shalt love the ,lord thy ,god1 with all thy heart10 c41 is an affirmative precept1 and is consequently included amongst those which are stated to be inferior to circumcision4 ,this conclusion seems so monstrous1 that one is almost afraid of having misunderstood the sense2 but ,rashi1 who must be acknowledged as an authority1 goes still farther1 and endeavours to prove that circumcision is equal in importance to all the other commandments put together4 8,it is equivalent to all the commandments which are in the law40 7,nedarim1 fol4 #ca1 col4 ii47 ,so that there can be no doubt that this is the doctrine of the oral law4 ,now just let the reader consider the nature of circumcision4 ,it is1 in the first place1 an external act1--it is1 in the second place1 an act performed without the will of the infant1 and at a time when he can exercise no act of moral responsibility1 and yet the mere act is placed above the highest perfection of a created being1 love to ,god and his fellow-creatures4 ,but the oral law does not merely assert this doctrine1 but gives its proofs1 and the first is1 that to the precept of circumcision the threat of excision is annexed4 ,of course1 we admit the fact1 for it is plainly said1 8,the uncircumcised man-child1 whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised1 that soul shall be cut off from his people2 he hath broken my covenant0 7,gen4 xvii4 #ad472 but we deny the consequence4 ,there is nothing peculiar to circumcision in the annexed threat of excision4 ,god has pronounced the same threat against every presumptuous sin1 as it is written1 8,but the soul that doeth ought presumptuously1 whether he be born in the land or a stranger1 the same reproacheth the ,lord2 and that soul shall be cut off from among his people4 ,because he hath despised the word of the ,lord1 and hath broken his commandment1 that soul shall be utterly cut off2 his iniquity shall be upon him40 7,numb4 xv4 #cj1 #ca47 ,here we see that presumptuous transgression of any one of ,god's commandments will be visited with the same punishment denounced against the omission of circumcision1 so that the annexed threat is far from proving that this precept is superior to all the other affirmative commandments4 ,on the contrary1 it shows that ,god does not judge by the external act1 but by the state of the heart1 and that presumptuous disobedience of any commandment1 as demonstrating an utter want of love to him1 will be visited with the severity of his wrath4 ,it is further alleged1 8,that ,abraham was not called perfect until he was circumcised10--and this is proved in the ,talmud1 by the words1 8,walk before me1 and be thou perfect40 ,but these words do not prove that1 even after his circumcision1 ,abraham was called perfect2 they are a command to be perfect1 but not a declaration that he was so2 and it cannot be urged that by being circumcised he obeyed this command1 and thus became perfect1 for this would open an easy way of attaining perfection to the most abandoned of mankind4 ,besides1 it is easy to prove that this word 8perfect0 is also given to the uncircumcision4 ,long before circumcision was given1 it was applied to ,noah4 8,noah was a just man1 and perfect in his generations1 and ,noah walked with ,god0 7,gen4 vi4 #i71 where that which is only commanded to ,abraham1 is asserted to have been found in ,noah4 ,god commanded to ,abraham to walk with him1 and to be perfect2 but he declares of the uncircumcised ,noah1 that he was perfect1 and did walk with him4 ,in this respect1 therefore1 even if the rabbinic interpretation of the words were correct1 circumcision has no superiority over uncircumcision4 ,the next proof1 namely1 8,that by the merit of circumcision a covenant was made with ,abraham1 respecting the giving of the land10 is equally inconclusive4 ,long before the covenant of circumcision ,god had promised the land to ,abraham1 and that repeatedly2 and not only had promised it1 but had actually made a covenant with him respecting the gift1 as we read1 8,in the same day1 the ,lord made a covenant with ,abram1 saying1 ,unto thy seed have ,i given this land1 from the river of ,egypt unto the great river1 the river ,euphrates40 7,gen4 xvi4 #ah47 ,this covenant was made before the birth of ,ishmael2 and when ,ishmael was born1 ,abraham was eighty-six years of age2 consequently1 it was at least fourteen years before circumcision1 so that the assertion that the covenant respecting the land was made on account of the merit of circumcision is altogether false4 ,god made the covenant1 not because ,abraham deserved it1 but according to his own grace and mercy1 when ,abraham had no bodily mark to distinguish him from the surrounding nations4 ,here again1 then1 the oral law asserts what is false4 ,but the rabbies were not contented with ,scripture proof2 they felt that the letter of ,scripture was against them1 and therefore had recourse to their own invention1 and have devised the fable that 8,circumcision delivers from the judgment of hell1 for that ,abraham sits at the door of hell1 and does not suffer any one that is circumcised to be cast into it40 ,that this is a regular and wilful falsehood1 no one that has reason1 and takes the ,scripture to guide it1 can possibly doubt4 ,it implies that many who are circumcised deserve the punishment of hell1 and are led to the very door1 but that ,abraham interferes1 and delivers them from their just punishment4 ,if they did not deserve it1 and were not liable to it1 there could be no necessity for ,abraham's sitting in so unpleasant a situation4 ,the guilt of these persons is1 therefore1 fully admitted1 and yet the wise men say1 that out of regard to the mere external token of the covenant1 ,god gives up his attribute of justice1 and acquits those who deserve punishment4 ,but it implies further1 that ,god does not deal thus to the ,gentiles--that to them he exercises all justice1 and shows no mercy4 ,abraham looks on with unconcern when a ,gentile is brought to the place of the damned1 feels no compassion and exercises none1 and the ,divine ,being himself is made a party in this injustice1 and want of compassion4 ,religion is misrepresented as a mere system of favouritism1 and the ,judge of all the earth as a doer of wrong4 ,that this is the plain drift of the story is plain from what follows3 8,circumcision is despised1 for the ,gentiles are reproached with it1 as it is said1 #8,all the nations are uncircumcised4'0 ,here the rabbies plainly tell us1 that ,god despises the works of his own hands1 that he disdains the overwhelming majority of his rational creatures1 and that not because of their wickedness1 or their cruelty1 or their idolatry1 or their profanity1 but because they have not got a commandment which ,he never gave them4 ,the rabbies themselves will admit that ,god never gave the ,gentiles the commandment of circumcision1 how then is it possible that he should blame them1 or despise them1 or treat them with unmitigated severity1 because they have not got what ,he never gave them8 ,if it had been offered to them1 and they had refused1 there would have been some ground for such a representation1 but at present there is none4 ,it is not true that ,god reproaches the ,gentiles in the words1 8,all the nations are uncircumcised20 on the contrary1 ,he is reproaching ,israel4 ,the context is1 8,behold the days come1 saith the ,lord1 that ,i will punish all them which are circumcised with the uncircumcised2 ,egypt1 and ,judah1 and ,edom1 and the children of ,ammon and ,moab1 and all that are in the utmost corners1 that dwell in the wilderness2 for all the nations are uncircumcised1 and all the house of ,israel are uncircumcised in the heart40 7,jer4 ix4 #be1 #bf47 ,this is very different doctrine from that of the rabbies4 ,god declares that the mere outward sign of circumcision shall not save from punishment2 that he makes no difference whatever between the uncircumcised and the circumcised1 but that he looks upon the heart1 and deals out to all evenhanded justice4 ,he says1 that he will punish the idolatrous nations1 whom he has enumerated1 but declares that he will punish the sinners of ,israel along with them1 and then to obviate the very objection which the oral law urges1 and to take away all false confidence in circumcision1 he adds1 8,the nations are uncircumcised1 and all the house of ,israel are uncircumcised in heart20 as if he would have said1 ,do not deceive yourselves1 thinking that your circumcision will save you3 there is a worse uncircumcision than that of the flesh1 the uncircumcision of the heart4 ,this is doctrine worthy of the ,divine ,being1 consistent with his attributes of justice and holiness1 and consolatory and encouraging to all his rational creatures2 whereas the rabbinic doctrine is dishonouring to ,god1 and contemptuous to all the ,gentile nations4 ,if it were believed1 no ,gentile would have any motive to serve or honour the true ,god1 from whom he could expect neither justice nor mercy4 ,it is equally pernicious and destructive to the moral and spiritual welfare of the ,israelites themselves4 ,any man who believes that his circumcision will save him from hell1 will feel himself at liberty to violate other commands without fear4 ,why should he be holy1 or chaste1 or honest1 or true8 ,his father ,abraham is sitting at the gate of hell waiting for him1 and will deliver him from the just reward of his delinquencies4 ,we do not mean to attribute such reasoning to all ,israelites--far from it2 but it is certain that on the minds of the ignorant and superstitious this doctrine must have this effect4 ,those who are acquainted with the ,word of ,god1 or know how to reason1 must believe that it is false1 but then it is their duty not only to disbelieve it in their hearts1 but to renounce it publicly1 and to teach the ignorant and uneducated that it is false4 ,israelites often feel justly indignant at the want of due appreciation which characterizes public opinion with regard to the nation1 but let them reflect on the causes1 and they will cease to wonder4 ,mankind in general does not distinguish between the ,jews and ,judaism1 but erroneously attribute1 without any discrimination1 the errors of the system to the men2 and how can they do otherwise1 so long as the oral law is still upheld as a ,divine code of law8 ,let ,israel renounce the errors publicly1 and all the causes of misconception will be removed4 ,but we would ask our readers to go a little farther1 and compare the doctrines of ,christianity on this subject with those of the oral law4 ,they will find that where the rabbies have erred1 the disciples of ,jesus of ,nazareth have taught the truth4 ,st4 ,paul admits the importance and the privileges of circumcision4 ,he asks1 8,what advantage then hath the ,jew8 or what profit is there of circumcision80 ,and answers1 8,much every way3 chiefly1 because that unto them were committed the oracles of ,god40 7,rom4 iii4 #a47 ,he does not undervalue ,god's mercy to ,israel1 but at the same time he honours ,god's justice and holiness1 by declaring that 8,god will render to every man according to his deeds3 to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality1 eternal life3 but unto them that are contentious1 and do not obey the truth1 but obey unrighteousness1 indignation and wrath1 tribulation and anguish1 upon every soul of man that doeth evil1 of the ,jew first1 and also of the ,gentile2 but glory1 honour1 and peace1 to every man that worketh good1 to the ,jew first1 and also to the ,gentile3 for there is no respect of persons with ,god40 7,romans ii4 #f-aa47 ,this exactly agrees with the words of ,jeremiah1 and with the character of ,god1 as set forth by ,moses and the ,prophets1 and must commend itself to the mind of every reflecting person4 ,let then those who reject ,christianity account for the fact1 that where the rabbies are wrong1 the preachers of ,christianity are right4 ,if all truth come from ,god1 and unassisted human reason must go wrong1 how is it that ,god should have helped ,christians to the truth1 and left the ,jews in deadly error for so many centuries8 ,judaism teaches that the ,gentiles are despised1 simply because they have not got an outward sign1 which ,god never intended they should have4 ,christianity proclaims that ,god is a just ,judge4 ,it says1 8,circumcision verily profiteth1 if thou keep the law2 but if thou be a breaker of the law1 thy circumcision is made uncircumcision4 ,therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law1 shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision80 ,judaism teaches that ,abraham sits at the gate of hell to deliver even the wicked1 if they be only circumcised4 ,christianity teaches that ,abraham has no respect to the outward sign1 unless it be accompanied by purity of heart4 8,there was a certain rich man1 which was clothed in purple and fine linen1 and fared sumptuously every day3 and there was a certain beggar named ,lazarus1 which was laid at his gate1 full of sores4 ,and it came to pass that the beggar died1 and was carried by the angels into ,abraham's bosom3 the rich man also died1 and was buried2 and in hell he lifted up his eyes1 being in torments1 and seeth ,abraham afar off1 and ,lazarus in his bosom4 ,and he cried and said1 ,father ,abraham1 have mercy on me1 and send ,lazarus1 that he may dip the tip of his finger in water1 and cool my tongue2 for ,i am tormented in this flame4 ,but ,abraham said1 ,son1 remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things1 and likewise ,lazarus evil things2 but now he is comforted1 and thou art tormented4 ,and beside all this1 between us and you there is a great gulf fixed3 so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot2 neither can they pass to us1 that would come from thence4 ,then he said1 ,i pray thee therefore1 father1 that thou wouldest ,send him to my father's house3 for ,i have five brethren2 that he may testify unto them1 lest they also come into this place of torment4 ,abraham said unto him1 ,they have ,moses and the prophets2 let them hear them4 ,and he said1 ,nay1 father ,abraham3 but if one went to them from the dead1 they will repent4 ,and he said unto him1 ,if they hear not ,moses and the prophets1 neither will they be persuaded1 though one rose from the dead40 7,luke xvi4 #ai-ca47 ,let the reader compare this with the rabbinic doctrine1 and then explain why it is that where the oral law errs1 ,god has given the truth in the ,new ,testament4 ,no4 ,,lix4 ,,cruelty ,,to ,,the ,,unlearned4 ,the great object of these papers has been to compare ,judaism1 as it at present exists1 with the religion of ,moses and the ,prophets1 and thus to ascertain whether the ,jews of the present day walk in the good old paths pointed out to their forefathers4 ,we have endeavoured to give our reasons for believing that the ,jews have been imposed upon by the inventors of the oral law1 and have now got a religion diametrically opposed to that which was revealed to them by ,god4 ,more than a year has elapsed since the first of these papers was published1 and yet no answer has appeared4 ,this silence may be attributed to one of three causes4 ,either there has been a want of sufficient zeal on the part of those who profess ,judaism--or1 prudence has suggested that the system would not bear discussion--or1 these papers have been thought unworthy of notice4 ,it is for the ,jewish people at large to consider1 which of these three reasons have influenced the champions of the oral law4 ,the ,jews certainly have a right to some explanation from those1 whose learning and station point them out as the natural defenders of ,judaism4 ,every reflecting man must be staggered by the fact1 that a strong case has been made out against the oral law--that1 contemporaneously with the publication of these papers1 strong symptoms of dissatisfaction with certain parts of ,judaism have been manifested in one of the most respectable synagogues in ,london--and yet1 that nothing has appeared1 either in the shape of defence or explanation4 ,that this silence has not proceeded altogether from contempt is made probable by another fact1 and that is1 ,that it is confidently asserted that a public answer was given orally to the first number1 and that this answer was satisfactory to those who heard it4 ,it is much to be regretted that the answer was not made known generally1 so as to afford the same satisfaction to others4 ,for ourselves1 we should have been most happy1 if convinced of error1 to have retracted any erroneous charge4 ,we have1 in the interval1 frequently considered the subject which is said to have been answered2 and now consider it our duty1 before closing this series1 to make known our reasons for still believing1 that that one topic is in itself sufficient to prove that the religion of the oral law is a system of error4 ,our arguments were simply these4 ,a religion which despises and insults the unlearned cannot be from ,god4 ,the oral law does despise and insult the unlearned1 for it commands its disciples not to marry the daughters of the unlearned on the ground that they are no better than beasts4 ,therefore the oral law cannot be from ,god4 ,secondly1 a religion which makes the murder of an unlearned man lawful1 cannot be from ,god4 ,the oral law does make it lawful1 for1 as we showed in ,no4 #a1 ,rabbi ,eleazer says1 ,that it is lawful even on the most solemn day of the ,jewish year1 to kill an unlearned man without observing any of the technicalities of the rabbinic art of slaughtering2 or1 as another says1 to rend him asunder like a fish4 ,therefore the oral law cannot be from ,god4 ,we now proceed to show why we still think that that line of argument is valid4 ,the first step is1 to establish the meaning of the expression ,amhaaretz1 which we translated 8an unlearned man40 ,the literal ,english of this expression is1 8,people of the land10 it might therefore signify the inhabitants of ,canaan1 but in the ,bible it is more commonly used of the mass of the ,israelitish people1 as for instance3-- 8,and all the people of the land rejoiced1 and blew with trumpets40 7#b ,kings xi4 #ad4 ,see also verses #ah-bj47 ,here the expression is opposed to king and princes1 and evidently means the mass of the population1 or1 as some would say1 8,the common people40 ,and1 again1 to give an example from the ,prophets3-- 8,yet now be strong1 ,o ,zerubbabel1 saith the ,lord2 and be strong1 ,o ,joshua1 son of ,josedech1 the high priest2 and be strong1 all ye people of the land40 7,hag4 ii4 #d47 ,here1 also1 the expression is opposed to the governor of ,judah and the high priest1 and plainly signifies the mass of the population4 ,in the oral law1 it has much the same signification2 it stands for those who are not counted amongst the learned1 nor the great men of the time1 nor the almoners1 nor the schoolmasters1 as appears in the extract given in page #g1 with this difference1 that in the oral law the want of learning is a prominent idea1 and the expression may therefore be applied to a high priest if he be unlearned4 ,in further proof we might appeal to the common parlance of the ,jews1 even at this day1 for they commonly call an unlearned man an ,amhaaretz4 ,we prefer1 however1 giving one or two extracts more from the laws1 where the expression ,amhaaretz is put in opposition to 8,the disciple of a wise man10 that is1 to a learned man4 ,we read1 for instance1 that in a court of justice1 8,the cause of the disciple of a wise man takes precedence of the cause of an ,amhaaretz40 7,hilchoth ,sanhedrin1 c4 xxi4 #f47 ,again1 1 8,in like manner1 it is unlawful for an elder to behave with levity to the congregation1 even though they be ,amharatzin4 ,neither let him behave haughtily to the holy people1 for although they be common and humble persons1 they are children of ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob40 7,ibid41 c4 #be47 ,again1 8,therefore1 when children and women1 and the whole genus of ,amharatzin1 are instructed1 they are to be taught to serve ,god only from the motive of fear1 and the desire to receive a reward until10 c4 7,hilchoth ,t'shuvah1 c4 x4 #e47 ,in these passages1 and many1 many more may be added1 ,amhaaretz plainly signifies an unlearned man1 and it does not appear from any one1 that there is any crime to be laid to his charge4 ,he may appear as suitor in a court of law2 he is considered as a son or ,abraham1 ,isaac1 and ,jacob2 he is put on a level with the children and the women of ,israel4 ,the only disparagement is1 that he has not been brought up at the feet of a learned rabbi1 and1 therefore1 cannot be reckoned amongst the disciples of the wise men4 ,the next thing to be established is1 that the oral law despises and insults those whose misfortune it is to be unlearned2 and here1 in addition to the complement paid to their wives and daughters1 noticed in ,no4 #a1 we bring1 as a proof1 the general rule which is given respecting their treatment3-- 8,our rabbies have handed down as a tradition1 that six things are said with respect to ,amharatzin4 ,testimony is not to be given to them1 nor received from them4 ,a secret is not to be revealed to them4 ,they are not to be appointed as guardians to orphans1 nor to an alms-fund4 ,one is not to bear them company in the way4 ,and some say1 that if they have lost any thing1 and it is found1 no public notice is to be given respecting it40 7,pesachim1 fol4 #di1 col4 #b47 ,here1 then1 the unlearned are branded as liars1 whose word is not to be depended upon--as rogues1 unfit to be trusted with property--as murderers1 with whom it is unsafe to walk by the way-side4 ,can contempt or insult add more8 ,yes2 rabbinic contempt had one insult more galling than these1 and that was to put them on a level with ,gentiles1 and this it has done by forbidding public notice to be given1 if any thing which they had lost should be found4 ,now1 we fear not to assert1 that this one passage is fatal to the claims of the oral law4 ,there is not a particle of resemblance in it to the merciful and just religion made known by ,moses4 ,it is the effusion of a mind intoxicated with self-conceit and arrogance4 ,the authors of the oral law were determined1 so far as they could1 to lay it down as a maxim1 not only that no wisdom1 but no truth1 no honesty1 and no humanity1 was to be found1 except amongst themselves1 and their disciples2 they wished to have the monopoly of all moral virtue1 as well as of all learning4 ,we ask both the learned and the unlearned1 whether it be possible that such a law could have emanated from the ,god of ,israel8 ,but there is not only excessive arrogance1 there is also gross injustice in their law4 ,it is ordained1 first1 that in a court of law1 the cause of the learned is to be heard before the cause of the unlearned2 this is in itself most unjust1 but is not to be compared with what follows4 ,the oral law forbids the appointment of an unlearned man as guardian to orphans2 can any thing be more oppressive8 ,suppose that an unlearned man1 on his death-bed1 thinks of a guardian for his orphan children1 and looks to a brother1 or an intimate friend1 as unlearned as himself1 but whose worth1 and honesty1 and affection1 he has long known and valued2 the oral law forbids him to make such an appointment2 and if he has no learned friend--and how1 where such a law exists1 is it ever possible that the learned and the unlearned should be friends8--he must die with the agonizing thought1 that his children must be left to the guardianship of a perfect stranger4 ,is it possible to conceive anything more oppressive1 unjust1 or cruel8 ,but the oral law is not content with this2 it will not permit an unlearned man1 even in his lifetime1 to recover property that has been lost4 ,whoever finds it may keep it4 ,the law for other people is1 that if any thing be found1 the finder is to have proclamation made in the city1 or1 if the majority of the inhabitants be ,gentiles1 in the synagogue1 that the loser may hear of it4 ,but the poor ,amhaaretz is excluded from the benefit of this command4 ,it may1 however1 puzzle the reader1 how the finder is to know whether the thing which he has found belongs to a learned or an unlearned man4 ,one of the commentators has solved this difficulty in the following manner3-- 8,if you ask1 ,how is the finder to know that the thing found belongs to an ,amhaaretz8 ,r4 ,isaac says1 it is in such a case as when a crowd of ,amharatzin is passing1 and we see that it fell from them40 7,ibid47 ,so that1 according to this interpretation1 the disciples of the wise men are positively allowed to retain what they know does not belong to them1 if they only see that it does belong to an unlearned man2 and yet these are the men who are so afraid of the dishonesty of the unlearned1 as to forbid their appointment to the office of guardian to orphans1 or treasurer to a charitable fund4 ,let any man of common sense decide1 whether this law is honest or dishonest1 and then let him decide1 whether it can come from ,god1 and whether such a religion is fit for an honest man8 ,the most important point1 however1 remains1 and that is1 the permission to kill an unlearned man1 or to rend him like a fish4 ,we have been told that this is merely figurative language1 but the context is not such as to lead to this conclusion2 on the contrary1 the passage itself1 and all that precedes and follows1 leads us to believe that it was meant literally4 ,in the first place1 it is said1 that it is lawful to kill an ,amhaaretz without observing the rules of slaughtering1 and when the disciples ask the reason1 ,r4 ,eleazar replies1 ,because these rules would require a benediction to be pronounced1 whereas he would not have an ,amhaaretz treated with such respect4 ,let any man explain the figurative meaning of all this4 ,secondly1 ,r4 ,samuel1 to take away all ambiguity1 says1 in the name of ,r4 ,johannan1 that it is lawful to rend him as a fish4 ,now it is known that1 with regard to fish1 the rules of or slaughtering1 are not observed4 ,all ambiguity1 therefore1 as to ,r4 ,eleazar's meaning1 is here removed4 ,thirdly1 it is evident that the rabbies looked upon the unlearned as nothing better than beasts4 ,they say1 that the daughters of the unlearned are an abomination1 and their wives vermin3 yea1 that their daughters are beasts4 ,now1 when men are so wicked as to use such language concerning their fellow-creatures1 are we to be astonished that they would draw the conclusion that necessarily follows from such premises1 and that they should allow these beasts and vermin to be killed8 ,when we see that these rabbies allow an unlearned man to be robbed with impunity of that which he has lost1 what principle of conscience or justice is there left to prevent them from killing him whom they have robbed8 ,if all the other principles of these rabbies were just1 honest1 upright1 and merciful1 we might be tempted to suppose1 that in these words they enveloped some mystical sense4 ,but when we see that the principles which precede and follow are an outrage upon humanity1 justice1 and mercy1 no such supposition is necessary4 ,but1 after all1 how did the commentators understand the passage8 ,if we1 as ,gentiles1 are accused of misrepresenting the sense1 what did the rabbies1 who succeeded1 make of this passage8 ,the commentary from which we have just quoted1 after saying1 that if a crowd of ,amharatzin let any thing fall1 it is lawful to keep it without giving public notice1 adds1 that this is to be understood strictly of what is lost1 but that it does not warrant the learned to rob them by force2 upon which the following difficulty is started3-- 8,why should it be unlawful to deal thus with his money1 when it is lawful to deal violently with his body1 for it is lawful to rend him as a fish40 7,ibid47 ,now here this rabbi evidently interpreted the permission to kill literally1 and he naturally asks1 ,if it be lawful to take away a man's life by violence1 why should it not be lawful to take away his money8 ,if the words had been taken figuratively1 there would have been no room for this question4 ,we have1 therefore1 neither misunderstood nor misrepresented the meaning4 ,the oral law allows the murder of an unlearned man1 and that with as little ceremony as it permits the killing of an unclean animal1 or a fish4 ,we therefore repeat our assertion1 that the oral law cannot be from ,god4 ,one such passage is quite sufficient to discredit the whole1 not only because of its intrinsic wickedness1 but because it displays the character of those men with whom the oral law originated4 ,superabundant self-conceit1 cold-blooded cruelty1 and unrelenting enmity1 are the striking characteristics of those men1 who1 by dint of force and fraud1 gradually enslaved the minds of the ,jewish people4 ,it appears from these passages1 and from the plain confessions of the rabbies in the context1 that the common people struggled hard before they submitted to the yoke of the oral law4 ,the attempt to impose such a burden1 evidently produced the most bitter animosity between the rabbies and the people4 ,the people were ready1 as one of the rabbies says1 to kill all the wise men1 and these1 in return laid down the principles of retaliation which we have just considered1 and which are a disgrace to the name of religion4 ,these principles1 however1 would not have triumphed if the rabbies had not got the whole power of the ,state into their own hands4 ,by means of that unlawful and heathenish tribunal1 the ,sanhedrin1 they were able to coerce the people1 and to kill all who refused to submit4 ,judaism1 therefore1 as it at present exist1 is a religion which was originally forced upon the ,jewish people against their will1 and therefore has no claims upon their reverence or gratitude4 ,by the dispersion1 ,god has removed the main difficulties in the way of their moral and spiritual emancipation4 ,christianity is in the ascendant1 and will not permit any 8wise men0 to kill the unlearned without ceremony4 ,the people may1 therefore1 assert their religious liberty in perfect security1 and without any fear of the ,sanhedrin4 ,we tell the ,jews1 even on the admissions of the ,talmud itself1 that their present religion is not even the object of their choice1 and much less the religion given by ,god1 but that it was imposed upon the consciences of their fathers by force2 and1 therefore1 ask the ,jews1 ,whether they still wish to continue slaves to superstition and cruelty1 when ,god has1 in his providence1 arranged the means of their delivery8 ,the ,jewish people have often had reason to complain of the injustice1 contempt1 and cruelty of the nations amongst whom they have been scattered2 but we ask them1 ,have the most barbarous nations ever treated them with more contempt1 injustice1 and cruelty than that which we have just found authorized by the oral law8 ,ignorant and superstitious ,gentiles have turned the holy name of ,jew into a term of reproach1 but where was it ever known or heard of1 that the most ignorant and most superstitious called the ,jews vermin1 or compared the wives and daughters of ,israel to beasts8 ,it is ,judaism1 and ,judaism only1 that utters this foul and inhuman slander4 ,in seasons of popular tumult1 mobs have risen and plundered the ,jews2 but where is the nation1 or the religion1 which has made a law that it is lawful to keep the lost property of a ,jew8 ,judaism1 and ,judaism alone1 is guilty of this injustice4 ,prejudice has unjustly assailed the character of the ,jewish people1 but what sect or party of ,christians ever thought of branding them as liars1 whose evidence is not to be received2 as rogues1 unworthy to be appointed as guardians to orphans or property2 as murderers1 with whom it is unsafe to walk by the road-side8 ,yet this is the deliberate sentence of ,judaism respecting the unlearned2 that is1 respecting the great mass of the ,jewish people4 ,just suppose that the ,parliament of ,england was to pass a law1 declaring that the ,jews are to be considered incompetent to give testimony1 or to be guardians of property1 warning people to beware of walking with a ,jew1 and permitting men to kill them1 or to rend them like a fish2 would not the ,jewish people perceive in a moment the injustice and the cruelty of such legislation8 ,would they not have just reason to complain of the blind prejudice which possessed the minds of the legislators8 ,and yet1 this is only what the rabbies have done4 ,if ,judaism be true1 then the mass of the ,jewish people are liars1 rogues1 and murderers2 for this is what ,judaism asserts2 and if the ,jewish people consent to its truth1 they are stamping themselves1 their wives1 and their daughters with infamy4 ,the truth or falsehood of the oral law is not simply a speculative question1 or a question relating to their eternal interests in another world2 it is a question deeply affecting their characters and their welfare at present4 ,it simply comes to this1 are all unlearned ,jews1 that is1 the overwhelming majority of the people1 to be considered as utterly destitute of truth1 honesty1 and humanity8 ,if ,judaism be true1 the answer is1 ,yes4 ,let1 then1 every ,jew1 rich or poor1 learned or unlearned1 consider whether he will still profess a religion that defames and insults the mass of his countrymen4 ,the character of the nation is foully attacked1 defamed1 and vilified1 but not by ,gentiles1 not by ,turk1 ,infidel1 or ,heretic1 but by the ,talmud and the ,rabbies4 ,the only way in which this calumny can be met and wiped away1 is1 by a renunciation of that system which has dared to utter it4 ,if there live a ,jew who has the slightest regard for the honour of the nation1 he is bound to protest aloud against the falsehood of the oral law4 ,that it is false1 requires no great stretch of argument to prove4 ,every unlearned ,jew1 who is conscious that he is not a liar1 a rogue1 and a murderer1 has the proof in his own breast1 that ,judaism is false4 ,every unlearned ,jew1 who duly honours and respects his wife and daughters1 and believes that they are neither vermin nor beasts1 is a witness against the truth of the oral law4 ,every one who believes that dishonesty is contrary to the will of ,god1 and that the murder of the unlearned is unlawful1 has the proof that that system which was imposed upon his fathers1 is not from ,god4 ,no4 ,,lx4 ,,recapitulation4 ,having1 by the help and mercy of ,god1 brought those papers to the last number1 we propose here to sum up their contents1 and to give a review of the arguments which have been urged4 ,the topics discussed have been very various1 but the object in all has been the same1--,to show that ,judaism1 or the religion of the oral law1 is not the old religion of ,moses and the ,prophets1 but a new and totally different system1 devised by designing men1 and unworthy of the ,jewish people4 ,that ,judaism is identical with the religion of the oral law was proved in the first number by an appeal to the highest possible authority1 the ,prayer-book of the synagogue1 which is not only formed in obedience to the directions of the oral law1 but declares expressly that the ,talmud is of ,divine authority4 ,so long1 therefore1 as that ,prayer-book is the ritual of the synagogue1 the worshippers there must be considered as ,talmudists1 believers in all the absurdities1 and advocates of all the intolerance of that mass of tradition4 ,that this is no misrepresentation and no unfounded conclusion of our own1 appears from the latest book published in this country by a member of the ,jewish persuasion4 ,joshua ,van ,oven1 ,esq41 has1 in his 8,introduction to the ,principles of the ,jewish ,faith10 a chapter1 headed ,,judaism1 which begins thus1--8,the ,jewish religion1 or ,judaism1 is founded solely on the law of ,moses1 so called from its having been brought down by him from ,mount ,sinai4 ,with the particulars of these laws he had been inspired by the ,almighty during the forty days he remained on the mount1 after receiving the ,ten ,commandments2 these he afterwards embodied in the sacred volume1 known and accepted as the written law1 and called the ,pentateuch1 or the ,five ,books of ,moses1 contained in the volume we term the ,bible4 ,we also1 from the same source1 receive1 as sacred and authentic1 a large number of traditions not committed to writing1 but transmitted by word of mouth down to later times2 without which many enactments in the ,holy ,bible could not have been understood and acted upon2 these1 termed traditional or oral laws1 were collected and formed into a volume called the #8,mishna1' by ,rabbi ,jehudah ,hakodesh1 ,a4,m4 #daej4 ,in addition to this1 we are guided by the explications of the later schools of pious and learned rabbies1 constituting what is now known by the name of the ,talmud1 or ,gemara40#cg ,nothing can be more explicit than this avowal4 ,a learned and pious ,jew of the nineteenth century honestly avows that ,judaism is the religion of the ,talmud2 and upon this principle we have examined ,judaism1 and compared it with ,moses and the ,prophets1 and the result of this comparison is-- ,i4 ,,that ,,judaism ,,is ,a ,,false ,,religion4 ,the premises1 from which we draw this conclusion1 are-- #a4 ,that the oral law is altogether destitute of external evidence4 ,to establish the authority of the oral law1 it is absolutely necessary to prove a succession of ,sanhedrins from the time of ,moses to that of ,rabbi ,jehudah1 or at the least an unbroken chain of tradition4 ,but it has been proved1 in ,nos4 xliii4 and xliv41 that there was no such thing as a ,sanhedrin until after the ,greek conquest of ,judea1 and in ,no4 xlv41 that there is no continuous chain of tradition4 ,the only evidence1 therefore1 which could beget faith in the mind of a reasonable man is wanting4 #b4 ,the oral law itself is full of manifest fables4 ,this has been proved almost in every number1 but particularly from ,nos4 xvii4-xxi41 where the fables selected are such as are particularly noticed in the prayers of the synagogue4 ,no one can doubt that the stories about ,leviathan and ,behemoth--of ,adam's singing the #ib;d ,psalm after a conversation with ,cain--of the river ,sambation--of the experiment made by ,turnus ,rufus to raise his father--of ,mount ,sinai having been turned1 like a tub1 over the ,israelites--of the descent of #fjj1jjj angels to crown the ,israelites--of the people's travelling #bdj miles backwards and forwards during the delivery of the ,ten ,commandments1 c41 c41--are all downright fables1 not a whit more authentic than similar stories contained in the ,koran1 or the ,arabian ,nights' ,entertainments4 ,any one fable would be sufficient to overturn the credit of the oral law1 but what are we to think of the host of downright falsehoods here enumerated8 #c4 ,it is directly subversive of the state of things established in the written law4 ,moses appointed the priests1 the sons of ,levi1 as the religious teachers of ,israel4 ,the oral law has ousted them altogether from their office1 as was shown in ,no4 xli4 #d4 ,the oral law encourages those ,heathen superstitions expressly forbidden by ,moses and the ,prophets1 such as magic1 astrology1 amulets1 and charms1 as is shown from ,nos4 xxii4-xxvi4 #e4 ,the oral law loosens the moral obligations4 ,it teaches men how to evade the ,divine commandments1 as was shown in ,nos4 xi41 xiv41 and xv4 ,it allows dispensation from oaths1 as proved in ,nos4 lvi4 and lvii4 ,it allows men to retain what they know does not belong to them1 if it only belongs to a ,gentile 7p4 #ah71 or to an unlearned ,jew1 as appears from ,no4 lix4 ,it sanctions the murder of the unlearned4 #f4 ,it leads men to put trust in mere external acts as a compensation for moral delinquencies4 ,the washing of hands 7,no4 x47--the external sanctification of the ,sabbath 7,no4 xxix47--the blowing of the cornet at the new year 7,no4 xxxiv47--the rite of circumcision 7,no4 lviii471 c41 c41 are represented as sufficient to save wicked men from the just punishment of their misdeeds4 #g4 ,though called an oral law1 because not written with ink1 it is really written in blood4 ,for the most trifling offences it sentences the offender to be flogged 7,nos4 xiii4 and liii47--for the transgression of the rabbinic commands respecting the ,sabbath1 it awards the sentence of death 7,no4 xxvii47--and1 by its laws respecting the killing and cooking meat 7,nos4 xlix4-liv471 it prevents the poor from getting food for themselves and their children4 #h4 ,it degrades the female sex1 by permitting polygamy 7,no4 xlvii47--by permitting divorce on the most trifling pretext 7,no4 xlviii47--by declaring women incompetent to give evidence--by excluding them from the public worship of ,god--and by teaching that they are under no obligation to learn the revealed will of their ,creator 7,no4 iii474 #i4 ,it oppresses and insults slaves1 by forbidding them to be instructed in the law 7,no4 iii471 and by placing them1 when dead1 on a level with brutes 7,no4 lv474 #aj4 ,it is a persecuting and intolerant system4 ,it gives every rabbi the power of excommunicating the ,jews 7,no4 xxxi471 and it commands the conversion of all the ,gentile nations by the sword 7,no4 vi474 #aa4 ,it forbids the exercise of the commonest feelings of humanity to those whom it calls idolaters4 ,it will not permit a drowning idolater to be helped1 nor a perishing idolater to be rescued1 nor an idolatrous woman in travail to be delivered 7,nos4 iv4 and v474 #ab4 ,it leaves those ,gentiles who are not idolaters without religion4 ,it teaches that they are not commanded to love ,god1 and breaks up all the happiness of domestic life1 by asserting that amongst ,gentiles there is no such thing as marriage 7,no4 viii474 ,for these and other reasons which might be adduced1 we believe that ,judaism is contrary to the religion of ,moses and the ,prophets--that it has not proceeded from ,god1 but is the mere invention of men1 and therefore false4 ,,ii4 ,from these premises we have concluded1 secondly1 ,,that ,,judaism ,,has ,,for ,,its ,,authors ,,wicked ,,men1 ,,unworthy ,,of ,,credit4 ,one of the most daring acts of wickedness1 that can be committed is to invent laws and principles1 and pass them off as the laws of ,god4 ,every degree of wilful falsehood is sinful2 but to forge ,divine laws1 and impose upon the consciences of men1 is the most daring of all wickedness1 for it not only deceives men1 but it dishonours ,god4 ,the ,divine ,being is represented as the author of principles and practices which are abhorred by the good even amongst men4 ,is it possible that those men could be good1 who invented the fables of which we have spoken above--or who overturned the ,mosaic constitution for the purposes of personal aggrandisement--or who teach that oaths may be broken with impunity--or that men may keep what does not belong to them--or that unlearned men may be murdered without ceremony--or that it is lawful to look upon the agonies and pain of an idolater without rendering him any assistance or feeling any pity8 ,if falsehood1 perjury1 dishonesty1 cruelty1 and inhumanity1 constitute men wicked1 then the authors of the oral law are wicked men1 and altogether unworthy of credit4 ,and therefore we conclude-- ,,iii4 ,,that ,,their ,,testimony ,,against ,,christianity ,,is ,,of ,,no ,,value4 ,many ,jews of the present day reject ,christianity simply because the rulers of the nation rejected the ,lord ,jesus ,christ4 ,but the discoveries which we have made of the principles and practices of these men show1 that there is no force whatever in this argument4 ,their testimony against ,jesus of ,nazareth is not to be trusted any more than ,mahomet's testimony against the fidelity of the ,jewish nation in preserving the ,scriptures4 ,this impostor says1 that the ,jews have corrupted the ,old ,testament1 but no one believes the charge1 because he has been convicted himself of forging revelations and laws4 ,the authors of the oral law have been convicted of the same offence1 and their testimony must be rejected for the very same reason4 ,they have passed off their own inventions as ,divine laws--they have taught their absurd legends as undoubted matters of fact--they are plainly convicted of falsehood1 and the only alternative is to say that these falsehoods are wilful1 and then the men who witness against ,christianity are wilful liars1 or to confess that the authors were mad1 and therefore incompetent to give any testimony4 ,in every case they must be regarded as propagaters of falsehood4 ,but falsehood is not the only trait in their character2 they were interested in their testimony against ,jesus3 they were his personal enemies1 because he opposed their pretensions and condemned all their inventions4 ,they had1 therefore1 a strong motive for condemning him1 and there is nothing in their character to lead us to suppose that their love of justice would prevail over their private feelings4 ,when the general tenour of a man's conduct is evidently the result of upright principle1 it is possible to believe that he would be just even to an enemy4 ,when a man's whole life has been distinguished by tender compassion1 it is possible to believe that he would not be cruel even to a foe4 ,but neither supposition holds good with respect to the authors of the oral law4 ,they do not even profess integrity1 for they teach that it is lawful to defraud an unlearned man--they declare1 by their permission to kill an ,amhaaretz1 that they had no value for human life4 ,if they were capable of murdering in cold blood a man who had never offended them1 simply because he did not belong to their party1 is it to be wondered at that they should endeavour to destroy one who who was a direct opposer8 ,the condemnation of the ,lord ,jesus ,christ by such men is not only no argument against his character or claims1 but even an argument in his favour4 ,it is a decisive proof that he did not belong to their party1 and that1 therefore1 there are not the same objections to his testimony as to theirs4 ,the ,jews of the present day1 therefore1 must find some other reasons for rejecting ,jesus of ,nazareth4 ,the conduct of their great and learned men at the time can supply no warrant for unbelief at present3 it is1 on the contrary1 a sort of presumptive evidence that ,he was a good man4 ,and this presumption is much strengthened by comparing the oral law with the ,new ,testament1 whereby we learn-- ,,iv4 ,,that ,,in ,,all ,,those ,,points ,,where ,,the ,,oral ,,law ,,is ,,weak1 ,,the ,,new ,,testament ,,is ,,strong4 ,in the first place1 it is entirely free from all fabulous additions to the ,old ,testament history4 ,it recognises the authority1 and frequently cites the writings1 of ,moses and the ,prophets1 but it is never1 like the ,talmud1 guilty of forgeries4 ,neither ,jesus nor his disciples pretended to have an oral interpretation of the law1 unknown to the people at large1 and therefore capable of being twisted to their own purposes4 ,they referred simply to the written word1 and by it desired to have all their doctrines judged4 ,in the second place1 it is free from all superstitious doctrines concerning magic1 astrology1 and other heathenish arts4 ,it does not allow absolution from oaths1 nor mark out any class of society as the lawful victims of fraud and violence4 ,it is merciful to the poor and to slaves4 ,it teaches that the souls of women are as precious in the sight of ,god as those of men4 ,it forbids polygamy1 and allows divorce only in one case where it is necessary1 and thus protects the weaker sex1 and guards the sacredness and the happiness of domestic life4 ,it differs especially from the oral law in its estimation of external rites1 and thus gives the strongest evidence of its ,divine origin4 ,if there be one sign of true religion more satisfactory than another1 it is the placing of holiness of heart and life as the first great requisite1 at the same time that it does not undervalue any of ,god's commands4 ,now this mark ,christianity has1 and ,judaism wants4 ,the former teaches expressly1 ,that without holiness no man shall see the ,lord1 and that for the want of it no external ceremonies can compensate4 ,further1 ,christianity knows of no violent methods of propagating the truth4 ,it nowhere tells its followers1 when they have the power1 to compel all men to embrace its doctrines1 or to put them to death if they refuse4 ,it has not a criminal code written in blood1 and prescribing floggings of rebellion1 or even death1 for a mere ceremonial offence4 ,it does not allow each individual teacher to torment the people by excommunication and anathema at his pleasure4 ,and lastly1 it does not misrepresent ,god as an unjust and partial judge1 who confines the benefits of revelation to one small nation1 and sentences the overwhelming majority of mankind to unholiness and unhappiness4 ,if ever ,judaism should attain to universal dominion1 and the principles of ,judaism be brought into action1 the whole ,gentile world would be doomed to misery and ignorance4 ,by pronouncing that amongst ,gentiles there is no marriage-tie1 it would rob them of all domestic peace4 ,by sentencing every ,gentile reader of the ,bible to death1 it would deprive them of all the consolations and instructions of the ,word of ,god1 and by forbidding them to keep a ,sabbath1 it would1 so far as it could1 annihilate every token of ,god's care and loving-kindness4 ,the triumph of ,christianity1 on the contrary1 and the full development of all its principles1 would fill the world with peace1 and joy1 and happiness4 ,the fundamental principles of ,christianity1 namely1 that the ,messiah has died for the sins of the whole world1 sets forth ,god as the tender father who cares for all his children1 and therefore teaches all men to regard one another as fellow-heirs of the same eternal salvation4 ,it does not deny that ,israel has peculiar privileges as a nation1 but fully acknowledges that 8they are still beloved for the fathers' sakes10 and that they are yet to be the benefactors of the human race as they were of old4 ,but it asserts1 at the same time1 that ,god is not the ,god of the ,jews only1 but of the ,gentiles also1 and thus makes it possible for ,jew and ,gentile to love each other4 ,the only foundation for the peace and unity of all nations is the recognition of ,god as the ,father of all1 and this foundation is the very corner-stone of ,christianity1 whilst it neither does nor can form any part of the fabric of ,judaism4 ,christianity teaches that the first and great commandment is1 ,thou shalt love the ,lord thy ,god with all thy heart2 and the second is1 ,thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself2 and teaches1 at the same time1 that all men are our neighbours4 ,judaism teaches that circumcision is the greatest of all the commandments1 and that none but ,jews and proselytes are neighbours4 ,thus ,judaism divides1 whilst ,christianity tends to unite1 all the children of men in the bands of peace4 ,it has only one principle of ,god's dealings to men1 and that principle is love2 and one principle for the guiding of man's conduct to men1 and that is love also4 ,let not the ,jewish reader think that we ,gentiles wish to ascribe any merit to ourselves1 as if by our own wit or wisdom we had found out a religious system superior to anything that ,israel had been able to devise4 ,far from it2 we acknowledge again1 as we did in the first number1 that we are only disciples of one part of the ,jewish nation4 ,from the ,jews ,christianity came to us4 ,it has been a light to lighten us ,gentiles1 but we acknowledge its ,divine ,author as the glory of his people ,israel4 ,all we mean by instituting the comparison is1 to show those who still adhere to the oral law1 that there is another ,jewish religion infinitely superior1 and more like that of ,moses and the ,prophets4 ,and we appeal confidently to every reader of these papers to decide whether the ,new ,testament or the ,talmud is the better book1 and to say which is the most agreeable to the will of ,god as revealed to their forefathers4 ,we earnestly call upon them to make the decision1 and to deliver themselves from that unmerited weight of odium which has rested upon them for centuries2 and from that still more dreadful evil1 the displeasure of ,almighty ,god1 which has followed them ever since they forsook the ,old ,paths wherein their fathers walked4 ,it is time for those1 at least1 who profess to abhor certain parts of the ,talmud and oral law1 to justify their professions by consistent conduct4 ,if they wish people to believe them when they profess love and charity towards all men1 they must begin by repudiating the authority of the oral law1 and renouncing the worship of the synagogue4 ,how can we possibly believe that those are sincere in their professions to men1 who declare that they are insincere in their worship of the heart-searching ,god8 ,every man who uses the prayers of the synagogue1 there confesses himself to ,god as a believer in the oral law1 and consequently ready to execute all its decrees of cruelty1 fraud1 and persecution--ready1 when he has the power1 to convert all nations with the sword4 ,that is his profession in the synagogue2 when1 then1 he comes forth from the solemn act of ,divine worship1 and tells me that he is liberal and charitable1 and that he abhors persecution1 how can ,i possibly believe him8 ,there is falsehood somewhere1 and the only possible mode of removing this appearance is by a public renunciation of the oral law1 and an erasure of those passages in the public prayers which affirm its ,divine authority4 ,this all truly liberal-minded ,jews owe to themselves1 to the ,christian public1 to their brethren1 and1 above all1 to their ,god4 ,to themselves they owe it1 because so long as their words and their deeds contradict each other1 a mist hangs over them4 ,to the ,christian public they owe it1 for they must naturally desire to know the principles of those with whom they are connected4 ,to their brethren they owe it1 for this is the only way of delivering the nation from the calamities of centuries4 ,to their ,god they owe it1 for by the blasphemies of the oral law1 ,his character is misrepresented1 and ,his name blasphemed4 ,,the ,,end4 ,footnote #cg3 8,a ,manual of ,judaism10 by ,joshua ,van ,oven1 ,esq41 ,m4,r4,c4,s4,l41 ,london1 #ahce4 ,page #bb4 ,,index4 ,abarbanel1 #abd ,aben ,ezra1 #abc ,abraham at the door of hell1 #dej ,adam1 #acf ,agadah1 recognized in ,jewish ,prayer-book1 #c ,ahijah1 the ,shilonite1 fable about1 #ceb ,almsgiving1 ,rabbinic1 #cjb merit of1 #cjg ,amhaaretz1 meaning of the word1 #deh disqualifications of1 #dei may be robbed and slain with impunity1 #dfa lawful to kill1 #f ,amulets1 virtues of1 #ahc ,angels carry up the sound of the horn at new year1 #bfg ,angels1 of the waves1 #aig ,angel1 evil1 #bbi ,angels ministering1 #afd ,apostates1 to be killed1 #cf ,arbah1 ,turim1 #aab ,astrology1 taught and practised1 #age ,atonement1 day of1 #bgi itself an atonement1 #bgi repentance an1 #bgi a cock killed as an1 #bhc death an1 #bii ,baptism necessary to a proselyte1 #cjd ,bar ,kochav1 #bbb ,bechai1 #adb ,behemoth1 legend of1 #abh1 c4 ,bither1 the city of1 #baf ,cain1 #ach ,catechism1 ,bavarian ,jewish1 #be gives a false view of ,judaism1 #bf ,charity1 ,rabbinic1 #aab ,charm1 ,rabbinic1 for a bleeding of the nose1 #aib for the bite of a mad dog1 #aic for a storm at sea1 #aif for the bite of a scorpion1 #bjj ,charms allowed on the ,sabbath-day1 #bjj ,charm for bed time1 #bja ,christianity1 a ,jewish religion1 #a ,christianity1 the religion of the ,new ,testament1 #b ,christians considered as idolaters1 #dai not counted amongst the pious of the nations1 #d not in a state of salvation1 #d ,circumcision equivalent to all the commandments1 #dea meritoriousness of1 #dej ,cock1 killing a cock as atonement1 #bhc ,commandments1 #ddb2 #afb ,cruelty1 ,rabbinic1 #h1 #ii1 #bji to women1 #cgg ,dead1 ,rabbinic mourning for1 #dbh prayers for the1 #bie ,death1 an atonement1 #bii ,demons1 asking counsel of1 #bjc ,deniers of the law1 three classes of1 #d ,deputies1 ,french ,jewish1 #bd ,deuteronomy xvii4 #h1 c41 explained1 #aa ,dispensation1 ,rabbinic1 from oaths1 #dcd ,divorce1 ,rabbinic1 doctrine of1 #cgc ,drunkenness allowed on feast of ,purim1 #dg ,edomites1 ,christians called1 #abc ,eleazar1 ,rabbi1 #f ,elijah1 the ,prophet1 conversation of1 with ,r4 ,jose1 #cbc ,epicureans1 #d to be killed1 #cf ,epicurean1 reader in synagogue suspected of being1 #abg ,evasion1 ,rabbinic1 #hj1 #hc1 #ajg1 #bbe1 #bce ,excommunication for not washing hands1 #ge ,rabbinic1 #bci laws concerning1 with respect to the unlearned and learned1 #bci injustice of1 #bci ,fast on the ninth of ,av1 #baf ,fasting1 merit of1 #bfd ,fire1 not to be extinguished1 #ajb ,flogging of rebellion1 #ii1 #baa1 #bbh1 #chc1 #chf1 #dbj ,friday1 ,good1 #hg ,gentile1 who studies the law1 guilty of death1 #bb who keeps a ,sabbath-day1 guilty of death1 #bb good advice not to be given to1 #cc woman not to be helped in child-bed1 #cc not neighbour1 #cd lost property not to be restored to1 #ce ,daniel punished for giving good advice to1 #cc who wishes to turn ,jew1 #fc a ,jew not publicly to receive alms from1 #cjf ,sabbath not to be profaned to save a ,gentile's life1 #bab1 #bad food regarded as carrion1 #chc food not to be eaten1 #chc1 #daf wine unlawful1 #dai he that steals from1 only to pay the principal1 #cd wine1 to drink1 worse than fornication1 #dbd ,gentiles1 idolatrous1 to be exterminated1 #db to be converted by force1 #db idolatrous1 not to be suffered in the land of ,israel1 #bh ,gentile1 drowning1 not to be delivered1 #cj ,gentiles1 duties towards1 #bd not brethren1 #bf not neighbours1 #bf not to be greeted except from fear1 #aj1 #bf1 #bh condemned for transgressing the command about tabernacles1 #bhh still have the defilement of the serpent1 #aef cursing the1 on the feast of ,passover1 #abj1 #aba1 #abb no pious1 now1 #fg marriage of1 not binding1 #eh and dogs1 #ajg ,gershom1 ,r41 anathema by1 #cff ,hands1 laying on of1 #cbh washing of1 #ga ,heathen1 who are not in a state of salvation1 #e ,high ,priest1 an unlearned man1 #g ,hilchoth ,accum1 #bh1 #cc ,avadim1 #ba ,avel1 #dbh ,berachoth1 #ga1 #gc ,deoth1 #aac ,genevah1 #cd ,gezelah1 #cd ,girushin1 #cge ,gittin1 #cgd ,iom ,tov1 #aaf ,ishuth1 #cff ,issure ,biah1 #fd ,kiddush ,hachodesh1 #ajj ,maakaloth ,asuroth1 #dai ,mamrim1 #cce ,matt'noth ,aniim1 #cjd ,megillah1 #dh ,mikvaoth1 #gb ,m'lachim1 #bb1 #be ,p'riah u'r'viah1 #g ,rotzeach1 #cb1 #cc ,sanhedrin1 #agb1 #cdb ,sh'vuoth1 #dcf ,taanith1 #baf ,talmud ,torah1 #ag1 #adh ,t'phillah1 #b1 #abh ,t'shuvah1 #d1 #bdg ,hillel1 the elder1 #ahg ,holyday1 how to make fire on1 #ajf ,holydays1 additional1 prescribed by the rabbies1 #ih1 #aja ,jeremiah unjustly condemned1 #ac ,jewish-,german1 #bhc ,jews persecuted in ,spain and ,portugal1 #db ,illegitimate1 a learned man takes precedence of ,high ,priest1 #g ,intolerance1 ,talmudic1 #bh-ci ,ioma1 #ai ,jonathan1 son of ,uzziel1 #ahg ,jost's history1 #abe ,isaac1 merit of offering1 #bga ,jubilee1 year of1 #ff ,judaism the religion of the oral law1 #b and of the ,jewish ,prayer-book1 #b and ,christianity cannot both be true1 #c a false religion1 #dfe its authors wicked men1 #dfg ,judgment1 ,rabbinic1 idea of the final1 #bhg ,karo1 ,r4 ,joseph1 #ag ,k'hillath ,shlomoh1 #bhb ,kiddushin1 #ai ,kimchi1 #ic ,leaven1 putting away of1 #hj ,legends1 #abg-afg ,levi1 family of1 still known1 #cab privileges of1 in the synagogue1 #cac ,david1 #acd ,leviathan1 legend of1 #abh1 c4 ,levites1 scriptural privileges of1 #caa ,liberty1 religious1 first taught by ,jesus ,christ1 #df ,luck1 good1 #ahb ,magic allowed by ,talmud1 #afh-agd ,maimonides1 #be1 et passim intolerance1 #bf ,meat1 lawful and unlawful1 #cig in milk1 laws concerning1 #djd contrary to ,scripture1 #djd1 #dje ,medrash ,rabba1 #aec ,merit of ancestors1 #bhe ,merit1 doctrine of1 #bdg1 c4 ,messiah1 already come1 #chg ,miracles1 ,rabbinic1 #bjc ,mishna1 recognised in ,jewish ,prayer-book1 #c ,mixture1 ,rabbinic1 command of1 #aaf ,muktzeh1 #ajc ,napoleon1 #bd ,new ,year1 ,jewish1 #bdg ,new ,year1 judgment at1 #bdg prayers for1 #bfd merit and advantage of blowing the horn on1 #bff ,noachid1 #be1 #da who they are1 #ee seven commandments of1 #ef may transgress commandments1 #eg murderer of1 not to be put to death1 #fb unintentionally killing a ,jew1 to be put to death1 #fa when received1 #fg how received1 #fh ,oral law opposed to the ,word of ,god in duty to parents1 #i1 #aj a mixed system of good and evil1 #af how much time to be devoted to the study of1 #af women and children not to study1 #ah perpetual and unchangeable1 #ec precepts of1 given to ,moses1 #afa ,oaths1 ,rabbinic dispensation from1 #dce1 #dej ,parable of ,good ,samaritan illustrated1 #bi ,parents1 if in captivity1 to be redeemed after the ,rabbi1 #i duty to1 according to oral law1 #i ,passover1 rites of1 #gi ,christ our1 #ia four cups of1 #if ,pentecost prayers1 #ade ,pesachim1 treatise1 #f ,pharisees1 enemies of the ,lord ,jesus1 #i bad men1 #h ,physician1 ,jewish1 not to cure idolaters1 #cc ,pirke1 ,eleazer1 #acg ,planets1 #age ,polygamy1 allowed1 #cff ,poor1 ,rabbinic1 oppression of the1 #ig ,rabbinic religion not for the1 #bcg ,rabbinic cruelty to1 #dad1 #dbi ,power1 ,rabbinic1 to excommunicate1 #bci ,prayer-book1 ,jewish1 acknowledges and teaches the authority of the ,talmud1 #b1 #c ,jewish1 full of legends1 #abg-afg ,priests1 scriptural office of1 #caj ,proselytes1 sojourning1 #bf how to be instructed1 #fc baptism of1 #cjd ,purgatory1 ,rabbinic1 #bif ,purim1 feast of1 #dg ,rabbi1 duty to1 goes before duty to parents1 #i1 #aj fear of1 as the fear of ,god1 #aa reverence due to1 #ae whosoever despises a1 to be excommunicated1 #ae not to forgive a public affront1 #bdc method of creating a1 #cbh ,rabbies not agreed1 #cii1 #djj ,rabbinic charity1 #aab evasion1 #ajg1 #aaj order1 novelty of1 #cbh power to excommunicate1 #bci acknowledgments that ,messiah is born1 #chi-cic ,ramban1 #adb ,rome called ,edom1 #abc ,rosh ,hashanah1 #bih ,saadiah ,gaon1 #afb ,sabbath1 unlawful for a ,gentile to keep a1 #bb laws of1 #ajd1 #aad-aai spirits cannot be cited on1 #ada damned have rest on1 #ada ,sabbath-day1 amulets on1 #ahd ,sabbath1 laws concerning1 #bhe-bij lamp1 reward for1 #bbi moving things on1 #bcb merit of keeping the1 #bbd jurisdictions1 #bcb ,salvation1 who are excluded from1 by the oral law1 #d ,sambation1 #aci ,sanhedrin1 not infallible1 #h great council of1 #afh members of1 magicians1 #afh understood seventy languages1 #afh all handsome men1 #aga pillar of the oral law1 #cce a later1 may reverse the decision of a former1 #cce not a ,divine institution1 #ccg of ,greek origin1 #cda greater and lesser1 #cdc business of1 #cde death to those who rebelled against1 #cdd contrary to ,scripture1 #cde ,parisian1 #cff ,satan deceived by the blowing of the horn in the month of ,elul1 #bff ,scapegoat1 #bhj ,schoolmasters1 ,rabbinic1 #cae ,scripture1 women not bound to study1 #ah not to be studied so much as the ,talmud1 #af when not to be studied at all1 #ag ,sepher ,jetzirah1 #aha ,schulchan ,aruch1 #g ,sinai1 #afc ,slaughtering1 laws concerning1 #chj laws of1 #cif ,slaves exempt from the duty of studying the law of ,god1 #ag unlawful to teach1 #ba regarded as beasts1 #dca ,souls of all ,israel at ,sinai1 #aeb ,sotah1 #gf ,stars1 influence of1 #age ,study of the law equivalent to all the commandments1 #ea ,tabernacles1 feast of1 #bhg merit of1 #bhg prayers for the feast of1 #bie ,talmud1 recognised in ,jewish ,prayer-book1 #c legends of1 #abh1 #afg ,tradition1 ,rabbinic argument for overthrow1 #aa no unbroken train of1 #cej ,treatise1 ,avodah ,zarah1 #bia ,bava ,bathra1 #ahg ,berachoth1 #afa ,gittin1 #aib ,moed ,katon1 #age ,shabbath1 #aeg ,succah1 #ahj ,z'vachin1 #aej ,turnus ,rufus1 #adj1 #baf ,unlearned man1 lawful to kill1 #f the wives and daughters of1 not to be taken as wives1 #f to be accounted as beasts1 #f man1 unlawful for1 to eat meat1 #g ,van ,oven1 ,joshua1 ,esq41 ,manual of ,judaism1 #dfe ,venus planet1 #agg ,washing of hands1 #ga to neglect1 as bad as fornication1 #gf who neglects1 excommunicated1 #ge ,wine1 ,gentile1 unlawful1 #dai ,woman1 insane1 to be turned out1 #cgg ,women1 exempt from the duty to study the law1 #ag do not receive the same reward as a man1 #ah not to be taught the law1 #ah minds of1 not equal to the study of the law1 #ah command of ,moses1 respecting1 #ba duties of1 prescribed in ,new ,testament1 #bb ,rabbinic degradation of1 #cei cannot give testimony1 #cfj not regarded as part of the congregation1 #cfa ,world to come1 who are excluded from1 #d all ,israel has a share in1 #fd ,rabbinic opinions about1 #abi ,printed at the ,operative ,institution1 ,palestine ,place1 ,bethnal ,green1 ,london4 ,transcriber's ,notes3 ,text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores 7italics74 ,footnotes have been moved to follow the chapters in which they are referenced4