ולא נשא לשוא פנשו word is deficient, while in the margin, the one to be said is supplied, although not written.25 So the Cabalists observe in Psalm xxiv. 4, it is written "He hath not lifted his soul to vanity," it is to be read "WD "my soul;" and in this they discover hidden meaning. The Talmudists often avail themselves of this rule to derive laws from various passages. All this corroborates the idea of something mysterious being concealed in the difference between the written and reading method, as explained. The tenth rule is, ♫ (large and small letters). In the Holy Scriptures, a letter is sometimes found smaller than the others, composing the word, as the in 77 "On their being created" (Gen. ii. 4), and the contrary in Deuteronomy TПs "one," the being larger than the other two letters. These things often occur: sometimes a letter is found suspended above the line of the others, like the in the name of Manasseh26 (see Question 96); sometimes they are turned upside down, as at the end of Numbers (chap. 10); all which seeming irregularities are pointed out by R. Ephraim.27 This observation is highly necessary; for if a human writer makes a letter unequal to another, the fault is considered as an imperfection or incorrectness; but how can such be applicable to the Divinity? who inspired the writing of the Law; and it is therefore more proper to suppose the seeming defect to be intentional, and not occurring by chance, and that it covers some mysterious meaning. חילוף The eleventh rule is (variation); that is, one letter is found for another in the Holy Scripture, as in Genesis xiii. 2, it is written instead of "his tent," for grammatically it should be written with a and not with an ; this variation is found in many places, and grammarians know not how to explain it otherwise than by saying, one is used in lieu of the other, but they can give no reason why; which is reserved for the Cabalists. The letters are often superfluously placed at the end of words; and as faults cannot be ascribed to the Supreme Legislator, in having accidentally used one letter instead of another, it necessarily follows, that some mystery is herein concealed.28 The twelth rule is (points); which also have their secrets. Five (long) being termed sovereigns or kings; five (short) serviles, or slaves; and one, the slave of slaves, as the learned Nachmanides styled it.29 Which mystery the Holy Scripture compels us to admit; for the ineffable name is always pointed thus 17 except in Deuteronomy iii. 24, it is written, which cannot be accidental. In some places dots are found on words apparently superfluous, as in Deuteronomy xxix. 29, we find them on the two words To us and to our children," and in other places, which are certainly intended to denote something; and consequently the Talmudists, in the Guemara of Berachot,30 and other treatises, explain the meaning of it. 25 An example of this is seen in Deut. xxviii. 30, where the written word is now and is The same is also found in Zech. xiv. 2, where n is substituted for the written one bawn. This we learn from tradition.-TRANSLATOR. .ישכבנה read 26 Judges 18:30. 27 Hir Keborim. 28 The following are the general rules for the change of letters as found in the Holy Scriptures:: 1st. Those of the same organ of speech, as the Gutturals, for . Palatials, for a. Labials, for 5. Dentals, y for 1. · 2nd. The four quiescent letters: the being often for each other. 3rd. Similarity of shape, as 7 and 7- -TRANSLATOR. 29 Pardes Rimonim. 30 C. 1. Linguals, for ↳. And Nasals, □ for 1. placed for x, and the and The thirteenth and last rule, is found on the Dy (musical accents), some being kings (or long) others serviles (or short), some divide words from each other, like our comma and period; some making the pause longer than others; others again join and connect words, as the thread and meaning of the sentence requires; but we find in some passages, where reason leads us to expect that they should be combined, the contrary occurs, as a divisive So in Numbers xxvii. 3, respecting the petition of the daughter of Zelophchad, it states they began by saying, "Our father died in the wilderness." There is a spon the word as which widely separates and divides it from those following; although, according to the sense and meaning they ought to be connected. The "Zoar" therefore says, "It covers great secrets. In the Decalogue every word has two accents, while all others in the Bible have but one; all which can only be satisfactorily explained, and properly expounded by Cabalists. .טעם מפסיק accent is found on them, called ".Our אָבִינוּ מֵת בַמִּדְבָּר The foregoing observations will give an idea of what is Cabala; its division into two parts-the artificial or literal, and symbolical or dogmatical, or the theoretical and literal-and its thirteen rules; similar to the same number by which Talmudists draw their conclusions on the texts of Scripture, and the Cabalists also use to explain the mysterious meaning of various matters in Holy Writ. The kind reader is thus made acquainted with the theological method of our Sages. Their knowledge is not only founded on reason, but deduced from plain texts of Scripture, whence they collect, that there is no science or knowledge whatever that is not contained in the Law; from it, as from a summary of the whole, they derive and collect every thing, and by the grace of God, the reader will understand that not only these excellencies are spiritual, but that the Law comprehends and includes even others unknown. The wandering tribes of Israel in the desart, who had no wants or cares, stood in need of nothing, as bread was rained down to them from heaven, and their clothing adapted itself to their growth and never wore out; some occupation must have engaged their attention; and being free from care, and especially under the divine guidance, so that nothing could occur to disturb their minds, is it not reasonable to suppose that they devoted themselves to the study of these sublime mysteries, especially when they had so good a master as Moses, whom they could consult on every doubt, and having God himself to assist them? It only remains to prove that the Oral Law is absolutely necessary to explain the Written, which shall be briefly done; only noticing the doubts, and leaving the explanations to the skill and industry of others, whereby the mind entertaining doubts of the explanation, may of itself acknowledge that the Written Law must be allied and bound to a certain fixed explanation, which is what the Hebrews term the "Oral Law." David says, "The law of the Lord is perfect." Now as perfection consists in having neither superfluity nor deficiency, we must acknowledge the Oral Law to be necessary; as the law without it, might be understood in different, and even contradictory ways, for some of its precepts are deficient, while others appear redundant, or superfluous, from being repeated again and again; as may be noted from the following examples. 1st. The first precept appears incomplete, for it says, "This month shall be unto you the beginning of months, it shall be the first month of the year unto unto you, ,"31 and does not explain what month was thus ordained to be the be 31 Exod. 12:2. ginning of the year: neither does it explain if they were to be solar or lunar months, for the Egyptians reckoned the year to consist of 12 months, or 3651 days; the Chaldean year was 365 days, 6 hours, and th. Neither does it say, how the solar or lunar years are to be calculated, the former having 365 d. 5 h. 55m. 25 s., and the lunar 365 d. 8 h. 48m. 40s., all which was absolutely necessary for the explanation of the precept. For the Lord commanded that the feast of unleavened bread should be celebrated on the 15th of that month (Nisan), when the new barley was ripe; the Feast of Weeks at the time of reaping the wheat, on the 6th of Sivan; and Tabernacle, on the 15th of Tisri, after the harvest had been gathered in: and the sin would be great to celebrate these festivals at other times, as he who eats leaven at the period of the feast of unleavened bread, incurs the punishment of excision; and if we were ignorant of the mode of making the solar and lunar years correspond with each other, we should fall into the errors which the Mahometans commit; every third year they celebrate their festivals in a different period of its course, the sun being in a different sign of the zodiac. All this being so important, who will not consider it reasonable, that all was verbally explained to Moses, since otherwise this essential requisite would be wanting? The second commands that fat (the tallowy part of the animal) shall not be eaten; from its similarity to other fat, it was necessary to explain its description and in what part of the animal it was to be found. Levit. 3:17. The third orders that unclean birds shall not be eaten, but gives no sign to distinguish them by as it does of animals. Levit. 11:13. The fourth enjoins that no one shall go out of his place on the Sabbath day, without explaining if "place" means his house, yard, city, suburbs, or otherwise.32 Exod. 16:29. The fifth prohibits work on the Sabbath day, without defining what is work, and where some acts may be lawful. Exod. 20:10. The sixth establishes that the priest should not go out of the sanctuary, but does not state at what time he is so prohibited, although he did not dwell there. Levit. 21:12. The seventh directs that the betrothed girl found with a man (not her betrother) should be stoned, which cannot be so understood if only verbally engaged; and the Scripture does not explain the meaning of the word "betrothed." Deut. 22:23. The eighth condemns the daughter of the high priest to be burnt, who should have connection with any one, but does not specify whether single or married. Levit. 21:9. The ninth enjoins the burning of a man's wife, who is complained of by her husband to the Senate, as not having been a virgin when he took her, but does not specify at what period of her improper conduct she thus deserved death, as the law says, for acting unvirtuously in her father's house. Deut. 22:14. The tenth referring to the marriage with a sister-in-law, it says, If brethren dwell together, and one of them should die, &c." it does not explain how "together" is to be understood, if in one house, neighbourhood, country, or united in ties of friendship, as a voluntary interpretation might dictate either Deut. 25:5. case. 32 The antiquity of tradition may be seen from this ordinance; for in Numb. chap. 15, it states that some of the children of Israel found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day, they therefore could not have been in their "places," yet we find no crime imputed to his accusers; they must, consequently, have been within a limit known only from oral communication, since none is specified in the law.-TRANSLATOR. The eleventh as regards inheritance; it does not state if a father or mother is to inherit from a child, and who is to inherit from a wife and so on. Numb. 27:8. The twelfth ordains the circumcision to be performed on the eighth day, and as no work was to be done on the Sabbath, it does not say, that if the day to circumcise should happen to be the Sabbath, which precept should give place to the other, that is, Was the Sabbath to be disregarded or the circumcision postponed ? Exod. 20:10; Lev. 12:3. The thirteenth, the same difficulty occurs respecting the Paschal Lamb, which must be killed exactly on the 14th Nisan; if that should be on a Sabbath, it does not say which should be observed. Exod. 12:6. The fourteenth, on matrimony, it says, "When a man shall take a wife," but does not state what ceremony makes the marriage valid; and as every nation has its own rites for tying the conjugal knot, it is clear that the Hebrews must have had theirs. Deut. 24:5. The fifteenth ordains that the king should not increase the number of his horses, wives, nor the quantity of his gold and silver; and as ambition is insatiable, it is certain that a limit must have been fixed, which does not appear. Deut. 17:16, 17. The sixteenth commands that the fruit of goodly trees should be taken to celebrate the feast of tabernacles with, and yet it does not specify from what trees as many are very beautiful it was necessary to specify the particular Levit. 23:40. one. The seventeenth orders the wave loaves to be brought from their habitations on the feast of weeks, and does not explain what is meant by habitations. Levit. 23:17. The eighteenth commands the celebration of the feast of unleavened bread, in the month of spring, when the barley is ripe; but, although it ripens in some climates earlier than in others, it does not say where. The nineteenth, on incestuous connections-that with the wife of a mother's brother, or with a grandmother, is not prohibited. Levit. 18. The twentieth, respecting the killing of animals, it says, "And thou shalt kill of thy cattle, &c. as I have commanded thee,"33 and yet in the whole Scripture no command of the sort is found; it is therefore necessary to have recourse to tradition, and thereby obtain full elucidation on every point, otherwise the law would not be perfect, as David says, but imperfect; as it would be deficient of what is required in it as regards the superficial meaning of the words; but for the rest the Talmudists elucidate every thing, either by oral tradition, or from the expressions contained in the law itself. Some deficiences having been thus stated, a few superfluities are to be noted, for example 1st. Not to seethe a kid in its mother's milk, is thrice repeated.34 Exod. 23:19; 34:26; Deut. 14:21. 2nd. It says a man shall not be put to death except on the evidence of two or three witnesses; two being sufficient, its saying three is superfluous. Deut. 19:15. 3rd. If a servant died under his master's punishment, he was to be avenged, 33 Deut. 15:20. 34 Maimonides considers this prohibition to be not only from the gross nourishment it affords, but also from its being a custom practised among some idolators in their worship at their festivals; this latter opinion he deduces from its being twice repeated, immediately after the ordinances of the festivals, as if it had said, When you appear before me at your festivals, ye shall not cook your food after the manner of the idolators, who use this practice.-TRANSLATOR. but not if he lived one or two days. If living one day was sufficient to exonerate the master, why does it superfluously say two, as the consequence might be inferred from one. Respecting all these incongruities, Tradition and Cabala give admirable explanations, without which we should grope on in the dark, and judge only by conjecture, so that it is proved how highly necessary Tradition and the Oral Law are. It was on this account that all arduous and difficult cases were referred to Moses 35 for what was clear in the written Law was open to every one, but as all did not understand alike, it was necessary they should enquire of the prophet of their day :36 for which reason Moses gave the Law into the charge of the priests, the sons of Levi,37 that they might verbally explain it to the generality: explanations by word of mouth being better understood than those by writing, where the sense is sometimes doubtful and perverted. Thus we find that some prophets and pious men, although intimately acquainted with it, did things apparently contrary to the written Law; for King Solomon sanctified the court-yard of the temple, and sacrificed off the altar; he extended the holy days to fourteen days, which included the day of atonement. David and Solomon established singers with musical instruments to sing and play in the temple; Urijah, the prophet, fled to Egypt contrary to the precept. 38 Hezekiah celebrated the Passover in the second month, although the law on that point was only for individual cases, because the people were not cleansed; Elijah offered sacrifices on Mount Carmel, although without the temple: all these acts being infractions of the literality of the Law; such saintly men would not have performed them unless tradition demonstrated a permission for so doing, on some particular occasions, as various treatises of the Talmud explain. Hence, the necessity is shewn of the Talmud and Cabala. And although Josephus writes in his 13th book to the Romans, and 2nd of the Wars, that the Hebrews in the time of the Second Temple, were divided into three sects, the pw (Pharisees), who alone followed the Oral Law ; the D'py (Sadducees), and 'D's Essenes, called also D'Dina, Bathusim rejected it, as adduced in the Guemara 39 of " Ioma," and various other places. The Cuzari,40 the commentary of Maimonides on the 1st chapter of “ Abot,” and Don Isaac Abarbanel, in "Nahalat Aboth," say that the Sadducees were worse than the Essenes, as they denied the immortality of the soul, and the resurrection of the dead. These decreased after the destruction of the Temple, until the time of the Gueonim, when Anan 41 and his son Saul, irritated at not being elected prince and head of the Captivity, revived the sect, and with some disciples, denied tradition. In the time of R. Sedaiah, they were followed by Hivai Alcalabi, who went into a thousand absurdities, and invented a new law; but R. Sedaiah so overpowered them by the force of his learned writings, that few retained those depraved opinions, and those who do are so unlearned, that they cannot even compose a book touching their belief, 42 and are separated from the whole con 35 Exodus, 18:16. 36 Deut. 17:19. 37 Ibid. 13:9. 38 Jeremiah, 26:21. 39 Ioma, c. 1; Meguilat Tahanit, c. 1, 4, 10; Menachot, c. 8; Batra, c. 8; Sabat, c.14; Masechet Sophrim, c. 14, and Kidusin, c. 3. 40 Cuzari, b. 3. 41 A.M. 4349-689, C. Era. 42 This is the sect more generally known by the denomination of Caraites or Textarians. Since our author wrote, they have published some works, but they only exhibit their errors. For their regulation, they have a book of rules founded on precedents: Is not this tradition, which they consider inadmissible? They obtain no increase to their numbers, for men endowed with the least common sense will sooner be guided by the opinions of the many (in which there cannot possibly be collusion) than by those of a few disappointed persons. |