{"id":2551,"date":"2020-02-19T17:20:28","date_gmt":"2020-02-19T16:20:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/?p=2551"},"modified":"2020-02-19T17:31:43","modified_gmt":"2020-02-19T16:31:43","slug":"judaism-of-the-second-temple-period","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/2020\/02\/19\/judaism-of-the-second-temple-period\/","title":{"rendered":"Judaism of the Second Temple period"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Foreword<\/p>\n<p>Those who do not know Hebrew may finally read the English versions of David Flusser\u2019s collected essays. The present volume, Judaism of the Second Temple Period: Qumran and Apocalypticism, is the culmination of a remarkable effort and collaboration on the part of translator Azzan Yadin and three publishers: Magnes Press, Jerusalem Perspective, and Eerdmans. It is with great satisfaction that the publishers bring Flusser\u2019s insights to a wider audience.<br \/>\nFlusser conversed fluently in nine languages and read scholarly literature in an additional seventeen. His first language was German. His second, learned fluently only after his immigration to Israel, was Hebrew. Consequently, most of Flusser\u2019s published writings are in German or Hebrew. Only a small percentage of Flusser\u2019s articles were authored in English. The scope and importance of Flusser\u2019s research is so great that it is unthinkable that his Hebrew and German writings should for long remain untranslated to English. Flusser\u2019s contributions to Dead Sea Scrolls research, Apocalypticism, and Apocalytic Literature is inestimable. Jerusalem Perspective is pleased to have had a hand in this publishing endeavor.<br \/>\nThough Flusser wrote less often in the English language, he did succeed in producing two volumes in English: with the help of his student R. Steven Notley, he wrote Jesus (The Sage from Galilee, 4th ed., Eerdmans, 2007); and with the help of his student Brad H. Young, he collected most of his English articles into Judaism and the Origins of Christianity (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988, 725 pp.).<br \/>\nMy relationship with Flusser was one of a pupil to his mentor. Enrolled as a student in the department of Jewish History at the Hebrew University, I began to study New Testament and Early Christianity with Flusser in 1964. At that time, he was only 46 years old. He continued to enlighten me until the final days of his life, even from his hospital bed at the Hadassah University Medical Center in Jerusalem. Professor Flusser died on September 15, 2000, his 83rd birthday.<br \/>\nFlusser was one of the world\u2019s leading Jewish authorities on the New Testament and Early Christianity. His pioneering research on Jesus and Christianity\u2019s relationship to Judaism won him international recognition. Flusser\u2019s collaboration with Robert L. Lindsey, beginning in 1961, resulted in a new approach to the Synoptic Gospels, the approach espoused by The Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research (www.js.org), which is an association of Jewish and Christian scholars. This unique cooperation was capped recently by the twelve essays (including one by Flusser, posthumously) of Jesus\u2019 Last Week: Jerusalem Studies in the Synoptic Gospels (ed. R. S. Notley, M. Turnage and B. Becker; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2005).<br \/>\nIn my judgment, disciples should assure that all the unpublished material of a prominent teacher is published before they publish their own research. The teacher\u2019s work takes precedence over the disciple\u2019s. With this in mind, I approached Hai Tsabar, director of Magnes Press, the publishing arm of the Hebrew University, about the possibility of translating into English the two-volume collection of Flusser\u2019s Hebrew articles that Magnes Press recently had published. To my delight, Hai was as enthusiastic about the project as I was. It is my pleasure here to thank him publicly for facilitating this difficult and lengthy project.<br \/>\nEven before the project was envisioned, Jerusalem Perspective had made an effort to expand Flusser\u2019s English bibliography. Since 1989, we have published most of Flusser\u2019s English output; note these examples: \u201c\u2026 To Bury Caiaphas, Not to Praise Him\u201d (Jerusalem Perspective 33 &amp; 34 [Jul.\u2013Oct. 1991], 23\u201328), and \u201cNew Portrait of Salome\u201d (Jerusalem Perspective 55 [Apr.\u2013Jun. 1999], 18\u201323). These and Flusser\u2019s other recent articles also have been published electronically at http:\/\/www.jerusalemperspective.com\/.<br \/>\nThe publishers wish to express their appreciation to Serge Ruzer. In consultation with Professor Flusser, Dr. Ruzer collected, arranged and brought to press the two volumes of Flusser\u2019s published Hebrew articles. (The present volume is the translation of the first volume of that collection.) The publishers are greatly indebted to the volume\u2019s translator, Azzan Yadin, Associate Professor of Jewish Studies at Rutgers University. My thanks are extended to the editors and graphic artists of Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, who have given us a product worthy of Flusser\u2019s genius.<br \/>\nFinally, I would like to sincerely thank the donors who made this volume possible (see the Acknowledgments page), especially the Branch family.<\/p>\n<p>DAVID BIVIN<br \/>\nJerusalem Perspective<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"6eLItnfg3y\"><p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.jerusalemperspective.com\/\">Viewing Jesus and the Gospels from a Jerusalem Perspective<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\" sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" style=\"position: absolute; visibility: hidden;\" title=\"&#8220;Viewing Jesus and the Gospels from a &lt;span style=&quot;color: #008080;&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Jerusalem Perspective&lt;\/i&gt;&lt;\/b&gt;&lt;\/span&gt;&#8221; &#8212; Jerusalem Perspective\" src=\"https:\/\/www.jerusalemperspective.com\/embed\/#?secret=HZHNlm5Gx5#?secret=6eLItnfg3y\" data-secret=\"6eLItnfg3y\" width=\"525\" height=\"296\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>Acknowledgments<\/p>\n<p>The publishers are deeply grateful to the following donors. Their generosity made the publication of this volume possible.<\/p>\n<p>Stephen and Jean Branch<br \/>\n(in memory of Buddy and Iris Branch)<\/p>\n<p>Patricia West Branch<\/p>\n<p>Steven Czarsty, Jr., and Judith Czarsty<br \/>\n(in memory of Mr. and Mrs. Alexander Branch)<\/p>\n<p>S. P. Branch<br \/>\n(in memory of Bible translators William and Betty Sedat, Guatemala)<\/p>\n<p>Wm. Stan and Suzy Bivin, Steve and Julie Bivin,<br \/>\nAndrew and Margaret Bosanquet, Quincy and Joanne Burgess,<br \/>\nAlistair and Nicola Montgomery, Phillip and Linda Pattillo,<br \/>\nThomas and Colette Rumfelt, Paul, Clarice and Jeffery Steen<br \/>\n(in memory of Gregory Steen)<\/p>\n<p>Dale L. and Pat Broam, James H. Charlesworth, Martha Eaton,<br \/>\nRyan Gustafson, Karin Hahn, Nancy E. and Vincent M. Johnsen,<br \/>\nEdwin and Helen Plenty, Warren J. Porter, Mitchell L. Riggs, L. Vasquez<\/p>\n<p>Introduction: Qumran and the Essenes<\/p>\n<p>The articles in the present collection consist of my studies of the Dead Sea Scrolls, a pursuit I began when the scrolls were first discovered and which continues to this day, as their publication continues. Though some of these studies were published years ago, I chose not to needlessly update them. I have spared the readers many of the hypotheses put forward by some scholars, primarily because I do not wish to take part in the creation of the \u201cphantasms\u201d that seem to have sprouted like mushrooms in the wake of the \u201cshocking\u201d discovery, a discovery that, for whatever reason, causes some people to throw discretion to the wind. That said, every publication, be it of a worthwhile study or\u2014and particularly\u2014of a new Qumran text, requires a willingness to reexamine our assumptions and, on more than one occasion, to abandon established conclusions. This ongoing process is reflected in the studies gathered in this volume.<br \/>\nMost scholars rightly identify the Qumran community with the Essenes, who are known to us from the writings of Josephus, Philo, and Pliny the Elder. If in the early days of Qumran scholarship Josephus shed light on the scrolls, today the roles are reversed and the scrolls aid in interpreting Josephus. In the course of investigation it has, moreover, become apparent that Josephus is a more accurate witness than Philo in all matters Essene. Of course, there are facts that neither author mentions, and details they mention but the scrolls pass over in silence. Ultimately, however, there are not many points of contradiction between Josephus\u2019 account and the writings of the sect.<br \/>\nThe identification of the Qumran community with the Essenes does not answer all questions. It is clear that not all the Qumran writings are sectarian or reflect a specifically Essene sensibility. After all, the Qumran corpus contains parts of all the books of the Bible except the Scroll of Esther (which was rare at the time), and even fragments of Ben Sira (Sirach), whose view certainly was at odds with that of the Qumran community. This apparent discrepancy may be due to the fact that the Dead Sea sect, like many of its contemporaries, considered Ben Sira part of the biblical canon. In light of this, it is necessary to distinguish between the sectarian writings and the rest of the Qumran texts. One scholar has proposed an orthographic criterion: that the sectarian writings employ a unique plene spelling. But while this hypothesis cannot be rejected out of hand, there is no reason to assume that a Qumran scribe could not have employed this spelling when copying non-sectarian texts. Another distinguishing criterion may be the special, somewhat artificial language of the sectarian texts, though here too the distinction is not absolute.<br \/>\nThere is no question that the whole (or almost whole) scrolls that were composed by the Qumran sectarians include the War Scroll, the Community Rule (also called the Manual of Discipline) and the Rule of the Congregation, the Hodayot, the Temple Scroll, and 4QMMT. The status of the Damascus Document is more complicated, since it was published before the discovery of the scrolls from a medieval witness preserved in the Cairo Genizah. When the scrolls were first discovered, there were scholars who recognized a connection between the Damascus Document and the Qumran writings. Since then, a number of important Damascus Document fragments from Qumran have been published (see DJD XVIII, 1996). The Qumran fragments preserve a reference to Damascus (there, p. 44), though it occurs in a problematic sentence that speaks of \u201cthe Interpreter of the Law who will come to Damascus\u201d (CD 7.18\u201319). Now, the Interpreter of the Law is an important figure within the community. We further find reference to \u201cthe converts of Israel, who left the land of Judah and lived in the land of Damascus\u201d (CD 6.5), and to \u201call the men who entered the new covenant in the land of Damascus\u201d (CD 8.21, and see also 10.19; 19.34; 20.21). It appears, then, that the Interpreter of the Law came to Damascus, where a new covenant was established among those who left Judah and \u201clived in the land of Damascus.\u201d The matter is further complicated by the fact that the community of the Damascus Document differs with regard to its laws and its social structure from the strict ideological structure of the Qumran community, reflecting more closely the description of the Essenes found in Josephus. What was the fate of the Damascus group? Why did the laws of the Damascus Document merge with parts of the Rule of the Congregation? Perhaps the community eventually settled near the Essenes on the banks of the Dead Sea, though there will undoubtedly be scholars who will use these issues as a launching pad for much more colorful hypotheses (assuming, of course, they are aware of the severity of the problem).<br \/>\nAs noted, we ought to distinguish the texts that contain the Essene worldview from the Qumran trove as a whole. A similar challenge exists with regard to the relationship between the Essene writings and the biblical apocrypha. It is clear that the Essene writings are apocalyptic\u2014this is a major issue in the scrolls. Among the Jewish apocryphal works there are some that emerged from the same dualistic conception that gave rise to the Essene cult, including Jubilees, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the Book of Enoch which is preserved in its entirety in Ethiopic (Geez).<br \/>\nOne area that has not received the attention it merits is the potential contribution of Qumran Hebrew to the history of the Hebrew language. I believe the language of the scrolls is largely artificial. The Qumran authors took care to avoid rabbinic Hebrew, preferring to imitate the Hebrew of the Bible, but the shift is not always smooth; occasionally one finds in the Qumran texts clear influence of Rabbinic Hebrew and even of Aramaic. Moreover, there are Qumran passages whose Hebrew is very similar to that used in Jewish liturgy to this very day\u2014passages composed by members of the sect itself. In this regard, it is important to bear in mind that the Essene sect, and the broader movement within which it took shape, are part of the wondrous phenomenon known as Second Temple Judaism. It would be wrong to isolate the Qumran sectarians from the broader Jewish context of the time. Indeed, they bear the same special message that helped shape the spiritual profile of Judaism to the present day.<br \/>\nAs for early Christianity, my Judaism and the Origins of Christianity is a collection of essays devoted to that topic. Let me state for now that the teachings of Jesus reflect first and foremost the views of the sages, but they are also influenced by Jewish apocalypticism. Jesus knew the Essenes but rejected their cultish separatism. To the extent that his teachings show traces of Qumran influence, it was most likely transmitted through John the Baptist, who was closer to the Essene sectarians (though he too rejected their separatism). Interestingly, the Qumran theology exerts greater influence on the second layer of formative Christianity, that is, on the epistles of Paul and other New Testament texts. A detailed discussion of these matters is available in my aforementioned book.<\/p>\n<p>1.      The Dead Sea Sect and Its Worldview<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>The discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls, whose authors were apparently the Essenes, has generated many new insights into different areas of the study of ancient Judaism, and will undoubtedly continue to do so. It is particularly worth noting that the discovery of the Scrolls provides for us the earliest known example of the ancient sectarian literature, and therein lies their import, as research tools into the social and religious underpinnings of the sects. The material that has been published thus far does not provide us with a comprehensive picture of the spiritual evolution of the sect, but with every new publication we are able to piece together a fuller picture of the religious ferment within the sect. The publication of the Hebrew collection Otsar ha-Megilot ha-Genuzot (The Dead Sea Scroll Treasury) which is now widely available, sheds new light on the spiritual dilemmas of the sect, and it seems to me that we can now hazard a preliminary reconstruction of the spiritual development of the Qumran community.<br \/>\nAll the sectarian texts found in the Judean Desert exhibit a series of core religious and social beliefs, which define the sect and distinguish it from the rest of the Jewish people. The classic formulation of this worldview is found in the third and fourth column of the Manual of Discipline. The sectarian view is ultimately based on a doctrine of dualism, which divides the world into two warring factions: the faction of light and the faction of darkness. According to the Qumran authors, every divine act is guided by this duality (1QS 3.25). The faction of light is led by the angel Michael, the Prince of Light (1QM 17.6), while the faction of darkness is headed by Belial, the Prince of Depravity. The entire world is divided, with each faction including both humans and angels. The sons of light, who are governed by the authority of light, are, in fact, the members of the Qumran community. The sons of darkness, on the other hand, are the people of evil, consisting of anyone who opposes the sect and its teachings. The doctrine of the bifurcated world and its warring factions is related to the sectarian belief in predestination: \u201cBefore they existed He established their entire design. And when they have come into being, at their appointed time, they will execute all their works according to his glorious design, without altering anything\u201d (1QS 3.15\u201316). \u201cBefore creating them You know all their deeds for ever and ever.\u2026 Without You nothing is done, and nothing is known without your will\u201d (1QHa 9.7\u20138). Thus, the division into two hostile groups was determined prior to the creation of the world. God furthermore decided who would be counted among the righteous, who among the wicked: \u201cFor you created the just and the wicked\u201d (1QHa 12.38, and see also 7.14\u201321 and CD 2.7\u201312). And yet, this division is only temporary: \u201cGod, in the mysteries of his knowledge and in the wisdom of his glory, has determined the end to the existence of injustice and on the appointed time of the visitation he will obliterate it for ever\u201d (1QS 4.18\u201319). The scrolls preserve many eschatological visions concerning the destruction of the wicked, fantastic descriptions of reversals in the natural order of the world, an eruption of the forces of evil from hell, and a violent war between the forces of good and evil both on earth and in the heavens. Only the good will be spared the otherwise total destruction\u2014where \u201cthe good\u201d refers, quite naturally, to the members of the sect themselves.<br \/>\nThese key doctrines are found throughout the Qumran writings. That said, a close examination of the individual texts reveals differences in the doctrines and beliefs expressed in each. What is the nature of these differences? Is there a discernable conceptual evolution, or perhaps there were different aspects to their teachings? The following survey will attempt to answer this question.<br \/>\nWhat was the core position of the sect concerning the creation of new ideas within the Qumran community? The teachings of the sect\u2014of at least some of them\u2014were esoteric, and never intended for Israel as a whole. Indeed, the members of the sect were commanded to \u201chide the counsel of the Law in the midst of the men of injustice\u201d (1QS 9.17, and see also 10.24, and 1QHa 13.24\u201326). And yet, when the same member was afforded religious revelation of some kind, it was forbidden to keep it to himself, lest the elders of the community be angry with him: \u201cAnd every matter hidden from Israel but which has been found out by the Interpreter, he should not keep hidden from them for fear of a spirit of straying\u201d (1QS 8.11\u201312, and see also 9.16\u201319). Josephus also mentions these two complementary rules: according to his account, members of the Essenes would vow \u201cto conceal nothing from the members of the sect and to report none of their secrets to others\u201d (JW 2.141). As for the rule requiring that members make available their discoveries to the broader community, it is tied to the sect\u2019s historiosophy, to wit, that the entire course of history, from arche to eschaton, has been divinely foreordained: \u201cEverything has been engraved before you with the stylus of remembrance for all the incessant periods and the cycles of the number of everlasting years in all their predetermined times, and they will not be hidden, and will not be lacking from before you\u201d (1QHa 9.23\u201325). The history of the world has been foreordained, divided into a series of \u201ctimes\u201d or eras, to the point that it is said of human beings \u201cYou have shared out their tasks in all their generations\u201d (1QHa 9.16). One wishing to live according to God\u2019s will must, then, adopt a series of changing attitudes, each according to the events of his time, of his generation. He must, then, \u201cwalk with everyone in the measure of the truth and the regulation of the time\u201d (1QS 8.4, and see CD 12.20\u201321). This is the reason for the positive approach toward the religious ferment within the community\u2014it was seen as a means of calibrating the spiritual and practical position of the sect with the changing course of history. The occasional revelations of divine will that manifested themselves within the community provided guidance regarding the appropriate position to be adopted vis-\u00e0-vis the shifting conditions, and it was the sect member\u2019s obligation to act accordingly. It was incumbent upon him \u201cto be united in the counsel of God and walk in perfection in His sight, complying with all revealed things concerning the regulated times of their stipulations\u201d (1QS 1.8), while the Qumran sages were enjoined \u201cto fulfill the will of God in compliance with all revelation for every period; he should acquire all the wisdom that has been gained according to the periods and the decree of the period\u201d (1QS 9.13\u201314, and see also 9.18\u201320, 8.15\u201316, 10.25\u201326, 4QPHab 7.11\u201314.<br \/>\nThe practical outcome of the community\u2019s positive disposition toward the revelations occurring in its midst, was that the individual members supported the evolution of its sectarian doctrine, and even guided it. Needless to say, the publication of individual views within the sect entailed a critique of the spiritual innovations of any individual member.<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>The full elucidation of the intellectual evolution under discussion hinges on the following questions: when were the individual scrolls composed? The excavations at Khirbet Qumran demonstrate that the sect settled in the Judean desert during the reign of John Hyrcanus (135\u2013104 BCE), or perhaps Alexander Jannaeus (103\u201376 BCE), and remained there (apparently with an interruption of a few decades during the reign of Herod) until the summer of 68 CE, when the region was destroyed by the soldiers of the X legion, during the war of Vespasian.<br \/>\nTwo of the sect\u2019s works reflect a recognizable political-historical setting, thereby allowing us to determine the date of their composition. The first of these is the War Scroll, an eschatological apocalypse, in which the Sons of Light (i.e., the members of the cult) will conquer the entire world in forty days. Their main enemy is the \u201cKittim of Assyria,\u201d that is, the sons of Japheth and their king\u2014referring to the Hellenistic king in Syria, one of the Seleucid emperors. Since Syria was conquered by Tigranes of Armenia in 83 BCE, and later became a Roman province, it stands to reason this is a terminus ante quem for the composition of the War Scroll.<br \/>\nThe second datable work is Pesher Habakkuk, a typological interpretation that elucidates the words of the prophet as references to the history of the sect. Most scholars agree, and with good reason, that the Kittim \u201cwho \u2026 come from far off, from the islands of the sea, to devour all the nations, like an eagle, insatiable\u201d (1QpHab 3.9\u201312), who occupy a central place in the Pesher, are the Romans, who appeared on the Jewish historical horizon at this time. The author of the Pesher understood full well that the Romans would play an important role in the history of the Jews, and predicted quite accurately that \u201cthe last priest of Jerusalem, who will accumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations\u201d will ultimately have their loot \u201cgiven into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (1QpHab 9.4\u20137), that is, the Romans. Pesher Habakkuk, then, was composed prior to 63 BCE, when Pompey conquered Jerusalem.<br \/>\nThe Manual of Discipline is the sect\u2019s regulations, while Hodayot is a collection of religious poetry. Neither provides explicit references to the political reality of the day, and so must be dated using\u2014among other tools\u2014their intellectual and doctrinal content. As I will argue in what follows, this content points to a relatively late composition. Among other factors leading to this conclusion is the conciliatory and irenic political tone of these texts, which contrasts with the activism of the War Scroll, on the one hand, but accords with Josephus\u2019s description of the Essenes as peace seekers, on the other. Moreover, I will argue that the Hodayot, which are appended to the end of the Manual of Discipline, contain innovative religious doctrines, unattested in the other Qumran texts. Therefore, the presumed order of composition would be: the War Scroll (prior to 83 BCE), Pesher Habakkuk (prior to 63 BCE), the Manual of Discipline, and the Hodayot.<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>Do the scrolls reveal the social background of the Qumran community? Among the members of the sect, a special role is played by the priests: the sons of Aaron governed the property of the sect (1QS 9.7), taught Torah and proper conduct (1QS 6.3\u20135, CD 4.3\u20134, 5.5), and were \u201casked for their counsel in every matter\u201d (1QS 6.4). It is undoubtedly no coincidence that the founder of the community, the Teacher of Righteousness, is himself a priest (Pesher Psalms 2.15, Pesher Habakkuk 2.8). Among the priests of the sect, a special place was reserved for \u201cthe sons of Zadok, the priests who safeguard the covenant\u201d (1QS 5.2, and see also 9.14, and CD 4.3\u20134, 5.5). As a result, scholars have concluded\u2014rightly, it seems\u2014that certain priestly families played a crucial role in the establishment of the sect.<br \/>\nThroughout its existence, members of the community refer to themselves with the biblical term \u2019evionim, the word from which the Ebionites derive their name. In using this term, the Qumran community apparently sought to emphasize their own asceticism and poverty\u2014a corollary to their virulent attacks against the wealthy and privileged. The roots of this ideology of poverty\u2014a pattern that repeats with other movements in other historical eras\u2014are found in the lower social and economic status of most of the Qumran sectarians. The Qumranites are distinguished by their poverty from the wicked, for \u201cthe strength of heroes lies in the abundance of luxuries, \u2026 the abundance of grain, wine, oil; they take pride in their belongings and possessions\u201d while the members of the community thank God that \u201cYou have not placed my support in greed, nor in wealth \u2026 nor have you placed the inclination of the flesh as my refuge\u201d (1QHa 18.22\u201325). They did not view their poverty as merely the result of social injustice; they elevated their poverty to a worldview. Not only does it distinguish them from the wicked rich, it acts as a positive force; they are not mere paupers, they are \u201cpoor in grace,\u201d that is, the poor who have a share in God\u2019s grace. The phrase \u201cpoor in spirit\u201d (1QM 14.7) marks the sect as a collective of the poor, within which the holy spirit acts, that is, as a community with a positive religious message. Indeed, the ideological commitment to poverty manifested itself in the community\u2019s practice of shared property, as discussed both by Josephus and by the Manual of Discipline. Josephus says of the Essenes \u201cRiches they despise\u201d (BJ 2.122). The ideology of poverty was closely connected with the ascetic tendencies evident at Qumran: they eat one plate with a single course at each meal (130), avoid oils that soften the skin (123), and refuse to wear new clothing or shoes until the ones on their body deteriorate completely (126). Indeed, audible laughter was prohibited within the community: the bylaws of the sect determine a punishment for any member \u201cwho giggles inanely causing his voice to be heard\u201d (1QS 7.16). The radical avoidance of any worldly pleasure is rooted in the ascetic spirit that dominated the sect. No member of the community \u201cshould walk in the stubbornness of his heart in order to go astray following his heart and his eyes and the musings of his inclination. Instead he should circumcise in the Community the foreskin of his tendency and of his stiff neck\u201d (1QS 5.4\u20135). Josephus similarly remarks (BJ 2.120) that the Essenes \u201cshun pleasures as a vice and regard temperance and the control of the passions as a special virtue.\u201d This asceticism leads to a certain intensity in their social and intellectual tendencies, and finds expression primarily in an abdication of personal freedom for the sake of sectarian discipline. The Manual of Discipline demonstrates the extent to which the community\u2019s bylaws systematically took over the life of the individual, and even over his thoughts. The totalizing demands the sect made of its individual members were undoubtedly a powerful force in shaping it as a single social entity. Moreover, the ascetic demands included a separation from the dominant society and its norms: a practical manifestation of the hostility the community felt toward the rest of society, portrayed as the lot of Belial and the Sons of Darkness, whose norms must be uprooted.<br \/>\nThe contrast between the socially ascendant groups within Second Temple Jewish society, on the one hand, and the community of \u201cthe poor\u201d (\u2019evionim), on the other, is further highlighted in the honorable title \u201cthe simple of Judah\u201d (1QpHab 12.4). The first Christians also adopted this honorific, casting themselves as the simple to whom God has revealed the secrets kept hidden from \u201cthe wise and the intelligent.\u201d It is possible that the Qumranites who adopted this epithet did so to highlight their radical rejection of the teachings of the sages. For according to the scrolls, the teachings of official circles are not only misguided, they are deleterious: \u201cThey are mediators of fraud and seers of deceit, they have plotted a devilish thing against me \u2026 to change your Law, which you engraved in my heart, for flattering teachings for your people; they have denied the drink of knowledge to the thirsty, but for their thirst they have given them vinegar to drink, to consider their mistake.\u2026 But they, hypocrites, plot intrigues of Belial, they search you with a double heart, and are not firmly based in your truth.\u2026 They speak to your people with staggering lip and weird tongue to convert to folly all their deeds with deceit.\u2026 For they said of the vision of knowledge: It is not certain! and of the path of your heart: It is not that!\u201d (1QHa 12.9\u201318). These words bespeak an opposition between certain circles in Second Temple Judaism and the Qumran community, and, indeed, a conflict between two mutually exclusive worldviews, each claiming exclusive truth.<br \/>\nThere was clearly a deep rift between \u201cthe poor of grace\u201d and their contemporaries, a rift explained by the scrolls in theological terms, as part of the division of the world into two warring parties. \u201cFor God has sorted them into equal parts until the last time, and has put an everlasting loathing between [their] divisions. Deeds of injustice are an abhorrence to truth and all the paths of truth are an abhorrence to injustice. (There exists) a violent conflict in respect of all their decrees since they cannot walk together\u201d (1QS 4.16\u201318). This dualistic doctrine provides an ideological grounding for the sect\u2019s hatred toward the broader society, that is, toward all who rejected their teachings and lifestyle, and refused to share in their plans. The members of Qumran vow \u201cto love all the sons of light, each one according to his lot in God\u2019s plan, and to detest all the sons of darkness, each one in accordance to his guilt in God\u2019s vindication\u201d (1QS 1.9\u201311; and see Josephus, BJ 2.139). Hatred toward the surrounding society is thus transformed into a religious commandment. The dualistic doctrine similarly justifies the radical disengagement from others, since they are the wicked who are to be avoided. \u201cNone of the men of the Community should acquiesce to their authority in any law or regulation. No one should eat of any of their possessions, or drink or accept anything from their hands unless at its price.\u2026 No holy man should support himself on any deed of futility, for futile are all those who do not know the covenant. And all those who scorn his word he shall cause to vanish from the world; all their deeds are uncleanness before him and there is uncleanness in all their possessions\u201d (1QS 5.15\u201320, and see also CD 6.14\u201316). Their isolated residence in the desert allowed the Qumran community to strictly adhere to God\u2019s commandment, that a chasm be maintained between the two parties that make up humanity. The desert community set itself apart from \u201cthe dwelling of the men of sin\u201d (1QS 8.13), and distanced itself from all of the sinful society of their day. At the same time, the desert affords an effective means for the ascetic withdrawal of the community from all worldly pleasures, from \u201cthe noise of the nations and the uproar of kingdoms\u201d (1QHa 14.7).<br \/>\nThat said, it is clear that the move to the desert has a concrete social function as well. After all, many popular movements in antiquity had their genesis in a departure for the desert. This move was motivated by the difficult social conditions, and often by pressures and persecutions that caused the group to seek safe haven in the desert. It appears that persecution played a role in the Qumran community\u2019s move to the desert. Proof of this is found in the War Scroll (which in our reckoning was composed early on in the existence of the sect), which refers to the members of the community as \u201cthe exiled of the desert\u201d (1QM 1.2), that is, as having been forced to go into exile in the desert. According to the War Scroll, the members of the community will do battle against the forces of the enemy \u201cwhen the exiled sons of light return from the desert of the nations to camp in the desert of Jerusalem\u201d (1QM 1.3). Here, then, the departure for the desert is seen as a means of concentrating the forces needed for the revolutionary military operation.<br \/>\nIn those days, anyone seeking a total revolution adopted an apocalyptic doctrine. After all, these doctrines hold that the corrupt order cannot be overturned until the current world passes away and a new world order arises, one suited to divine justice. Man cannot precipitate this revolution unaided; righteousness will take the place of corruption only with divine assistance. The apocalyptic thinker sees himself as living in the final generation, and thus maintains the hope of seeing the dawn of a new, just world.<br \/>\nWe saw above that for the Qumran community there existed a chasm between them and the rest of Jewish society, a.k.a. the Sons of Darkness, a chasm that could only be bridged in the end of days, when evil is completely abolished. The worldview of the \u201cpoor of grace\u201d was, then, thoroughly apocalyptic: they believed their time was the end time. They were \u201cthose who observe the Law, whose hands will not desert the service of truth when the final age is extended beyond them, because all the ages of God will come at the right time, as he established for them in the mystery of his cunning\u201d (1QpHab 7.11\u201314). God, then, has revealed to them the secrets of \u201cthe consummation of the era\u201d (1QpHab 7.2), which they may yet live to witness. Only the righteous\u2014these being, of course, the members of the Qumran community\u2014will be spared the total annihilation. In them will the verse \u201cThe meek shall inherit the earth, and delight themselves in abundant prosperity\u201d (Ps. 37:11) be fulfilled, a verse that concerns \u201cthe congregation of the poor who will tough out the period of distress and will be rescued from all the snares of Belial\u201d (4QpPsa 2.9\u201311). The end of days will usher in not only a cosmic revolution, but a social revolution, here on earth, in which \u201cthe wicked ones of Israel will be cut off and exterminated for ever\u201d (4QpPsa 3.12\u201313), and \u201cthe congregation of his chosen ones \u2026 will be chiefs and princes\u201d (4QpPsa 3.5). The apocalyptic doctrines did not merely console the Community, they promised wonderful rewards to those who steadfastly adhere to the community of the poor.<br \/>\nIt should be noted that the scrolls published thus far do not emphasize the role of the messiah. True, one of the Hodayot speaks of the birth of \u201ca wonderful counselor with his strength\u201d (1QHa 11.10), i.e., the messiah. There are also scattered references to \u201cthe messiahs of Aaron and Israel\u201d (1QS 9.11), references to the messiah and to the high priest of his time; however, so far none of the scrolls that have been discovered give voice to doctrines or beliefs that involve the personality of the messiah (or the two messiahs). It appears that the relatively marginal role of the messianic figure within the religious system of the scrolls is the result of the central role played by the Qumran community itself in the redemption of humanity.<br \/>\nApocalyptic beliefs are intended from the outset to motivate the believers to change their ways: they are formed for this very purpose, and accepted by their holders as such. The nature of the change depends, of course, on the content of the beliefs. Thus, the belief of Jesus and his disciples that the kingdom of heaven had already appeared, situated them in a realm of purely ethical considerations, which led to a fundamentally pacifistic decision. In contrast, the doctrine of the absolute eradication of evil in the end of days\u2014which appears in all the major scrolls\u2014contains a strong element of resistance to contemporary society as such. This apocalyptic view is rooted in the dualistic nature of Qumran\u2019s teachings: in the end of days the lot of Belial will be annihilated and the sons of light will rule the world. But the hope for eschatological revolution was not presented as a flight of fancy. For it is this hope that inspired one of the Qumran scribes to compose the War Scroll, with its detailed discussion of the war between the sect and its enemies. In this war, which will last forty years (see also 4QpPsa 1.6\u20138), the sons of light will emerge from the desert, conquering the Land of Israel, then the entire world. The author does not merely imagine the development of the war\u2014the opening paragraph of the War Scroll (1QM 1.1\u20137) sets out the historical conditions that will hold at the time of its outbreak. As noted, we are of the opinion that these conditions could not hold after 83 BCE. The war will begin \u201cwhen the exiled sons of light return from the desert of the nations to camp in the desert of Jerusalem\u201d (1QM 1.5). It would appear, then, that we are situated at the beginning of the community\u2019s desert sojourn, the beginning of its exile. The ultimate goal of the war\u2014world conquest\u2014is admittedly fantastic, but it should be noted that the scroll allots six years of battle to the conquest of Israel, and that most of the text is devoted to battling a very real enemy, the \u201cKittim of Assyria\u201d and their (Seleucid) king. The detailed description of the warriors\u2019 armaments and battle tactics further suggests that the author believed this to be a realistic plan. It appears the War Scroll was intended to urge the members of the community to hasten salvation through military force. After all, this was a period of fierce civil wars and recurring invasions by foreign enemies; a military adventure might not have seemed so far-fetched. Indeed, a group centered in the desert may well have hoped that, given the general upheaval in the Land of Israel, they might enjoy the same success as the early Maccabees.<br \/>\nThe driving force behind the War Scroll and its military plans was the ideological commitment of an apocalyptic mind. This would be the war to end all wars. The two camps facing off in battle are, in fact, the two factions into which God has divided the world. The \u201cSons of Light,\u201d the Qumranites, will fight the Sons of Darkness, with absolute victory to the former. Then there will dawn \u201ca time of salvation for the nation of God and a period of rule for all the men of his lot, and the everlasting destruction for all the lot of Belial\u201d (1QM 1.5). Indeed, the entire cosmos will participate in the war, and the Sons of Light will receive succor from heavenly forces, \u201cfor this will be the day determined by him since ancient times for the war of extermination against the sons of darkness. On this (day), the assembly of God and the congregation of men shall confront each other for great destruction. The sons of light and the lot of darkness shall battle together for God\u2019s might, between the roar of a huge multitude and the shout of gods and of men\u201d (1QM 1.10\u201311). The confidence of the author that \u201cthe poor whom you save\u201d will be able \u201cto fell the hordes of Belial\u201d (1QM 11.8\u20139) is, then, based on two factors. First, the belief that the entire war is part of God\u2019s plan\u2014for \u201csince ancient time you determined the day of the great battle \u2026 to exterminate all the sons of darkness\u201d (1QM 13.14\u201316). And second, the expected assistance of the heavenly hosts, headed by \u201cthe majestic angel of the kingdom, Michael\u201d (1QM 17.6).<br \/>\nThe War Scroll, then, is an admixture of apocalyptic visions and sober military strategy; a cosmic victory is assured the Community by its advanced war tactics. This combination of mythical doctrines and Realpolitik considerations, which allowed the author to plan the war down to the most minute details, is not sui generic. To the contrary, this is the typical ideology of Jewish messianic movements, as well as various medieval sectarian movements\u2014an ideology that on occasion succeeded in pushing its adherents into actual war (as with the Hussites and the German peasants). As far as we know, however, the Qumran community never tried to carry out the plans of the War Scroll.<br \/>\nWe have seen that the War Scroll advocates one of the core beliefs of Qumran, namely the division of the world into two factions (see particularly 1QM column 13). The enmity toward the \u201clot of Belial\u201d\u2014couched as a religious commandment by the sect\u2014encouraged them to conceive of a military action that will destroy the Sons of Darkness. The division of the world into two factions is understood as a divine decree that precedes the creation of the world. In other words, there was current at Qumran a belief in \u201cdouble\u201d predestination (praedestinatio duplex): God determined who would be righteous and who wicked. \u201cYou, you alone have created the just man, and from the womb you determined him for the period of approval to keep your covenant \u2026 to open all the narrowness of his soul to eternal salvation and endless peace without want. And you have raised his glory above flesh. But the wicked you have created \u2026 from the womb you have predestined them for the day of slaughter. For they walk on a path that is not good \u2026 their soul loathes your [covenant].\u2026 You have established all those \u2026 to carry out great judgments against them before the eyes of all your creatures\u201d (1QHa 7.17\u201323). Both the reward of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked are divinely predestined. As scholars have noted, the belief in double predestination does entail that its adherents passively submit to their fate. When the believers believe that as members of God\u2019s lot they must act in accordance with God\u2019s will, the praedestinatio duplex can provide them confidence and determination, \u201cfor all their deeds are in your truth\u201d (1QHa 14.8\u20139). In addition to this confidence, the doctrine of double predestination can engender among its adherents an ideology of military activism (e.g., Cromwell\u2019s puritan soldiers), for the enemies of God\u2019s select were indeed created to be punished. Moreover, the victory of the righteous over the Sons of Belial has been foreordained, and thus may be seen as a fait accompli. The War Scroll espouses the doctrine of predestination (see in particular 12.1\u20135) and believed that the enemies\u2019 downfall at the hands of the sons of light is a foregone conclusion, since \u201cwe, in the lot of your truth, rejoice in your mighty hand \u2026 whose mighty hand is with the poor \u2026 since ancient time you determined the day of the great battle \u2026 to humiliate darkness\u201d (1QM 13.12\u201316).<br \/>\nFrom these statements it is clear that the dualism, double predestination, and apocalypticism of the Qumran community could engender an activist ideology (as indeed happened in other movements), and, as the War Scroll clearly demonstrates, this activism took on a military form. Of course, this ideology is not limited to a single book. After all, the War Scroll was accepted within Qumran, so the hopes of its author were shared by the community, at least for a time. As we will see, even after the sect underwent a significant spiritual transformation, the Qumran community did not completely relinquish their activist stance, but rather postponed the earthly revolution to the distant future time. Apparently, the War Scroll came to be understood as referring to this more distant future.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>The day of judgment awaited by the War Scroll\u2019s author never came. The members of the community began to realize that \u201cthe final age will be extended and go beyond all that the prophets say, because the mysteries of God are wonderful\u201d (1QpHab 7.7\u20138). When the Romans invaded, the Qumranites saw them\u2014and not the members of the community\u2014as the instruments of divine wrath against \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem \u2026 [for] in the last days their riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (1QpHab 9.4\u20137).<br \/>\nWere it not for the existence of elements that proved themselves malleable to these new developments, the failure of the activist line might have signaled the collapse of the Community altogether. But the extant sources portray the Dead Sea community as a fascinating example of the evolution of a philosophy that manages to preserve itself only by altering the meaning of key concepts, even to the point of outright reversal.<br \/>\nThe activism that had earlier dominated now became a conditional pacifism. To be sure, the members of the Community did not relinquish their dream of ultimate victory, but they did allow that the time for this victory was not yet at hand. They are now \u201c[those who keep] their nerve until the time of your judgments\u201d (1QHa 6.4). The community bases this new position on the doctrine of double predestination, which itself undergoes a transformation. The same view that had previously emboldened the author of the War Scroll to outline a holy war aimed at annihilating the lot of Belial, now becomes an ideology of patient acceptance of the injustice that governs the world. The new logic is as follows: God predetermined the time of vengeance against the Sons of Darkness according to his secret wisdom, but has yet to reveal this time to his followers. It is incumbent upon the members of the sect to avoid any rash activity that might undermine the world order established by God since before creation, for \u201call who know you do not change your words. For you are just, and all your chosen ones are truth. All injustice and wickedness you obliterate for ever, and your justice is revealed to the eyes of all your creatures\u201d (1QHa 6.15\u201316). Similarly we find admonitions to each member of the Community that \u201cin this time \u2026 all that happens to him he should welcome freely and be gratified by nothing except God\u2019s will \u2026 [and] wish for nothing that he has not commanded and be ever alert to the precept of God\u201d (1QS 9.24\u201325). In other words, he must acquiesce to the unjust decrees of the government of Belial that currently rules the world, since this too is God\u2019s will and one cannot rise up against it. The day of judgment will surely come, but for now it is necessary \u201cto reply with meekness to the haughty of spirit, and with a broken spirit to the men of the bending (of the Law), those who point the finger and speak evil\u201d (1QS 11.1\u20132). It is from this spirit of acquiescence to the evil forces governing the world that the community member prays to God, promising: \u201cI shall not repay anyone with an evil reward; with goodness I shall pursue man. For to God (belongs) the judgment of every living being, and it is he who pays man his wages. I shall not be jealous with a wicked spirit, and my soul shall not crave wealth by violence. I shall not be involved in any dispute with the men of the pit until the day of vengeance\u201d (1QS 10.17\u201319). Josephus too recounts\u2014in an almost precise parallel\u2014that the Essene swears \u201cto keep his hands from stealing and his soul pure from unholy gain\u201d (BJ 2.141). But he omits to mention that they abstain from revolutionary activity only for a limited time\u2014\u201cuntil the day of vengeance.\u201d The demand to acquiesce to those wielding worldly power has ramifications for one\u2019s personal behavior: not only must one abstain from violence toward them, it is necessary to obey their political and economic demands. \u201cIn this time,\u201d the Manual of Discipline enjoins \u201ceverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit. To them he should leave goods and hand-made items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed before someone domineering him. He should be a man enthusiastic for the decree and for its time, for the day of revenge. He should perform (God\u2019s) will in all that his hand should tackle and in all that he controls, as he commanded\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201324). Following the failure of the activist approach, the hatred of the men of the pit\u2014the very people who are to be destroyed in the approaching day of vengeance\u2014is buried under the facade of the absolute subjugation fitting of slaves!<br \/>\nThere is a further parallel between Josephus\u2019s description of the Essenes and the scrolls, with regard to the acceptance of imperial authority. According to Josephus, they vow \u201cto keep faith with all men, especially with the powers that be, since no ruler attains his office save by the will of God\u201d (BJ 2.140). Here too Josephus makes no mention of the temporary nature of this subjection, nor of the \u201ceverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit.\u201d Did the Essenes manage to hide their hatred of society at large and their eagerness for the day of vengeance from Josephus, or did he omit these details because they did not fit with his portrait of the Essenes as Jewish philosophers, seekers of peace and brotherhood? Whatever the case, the Manual of Discipline and the Hodayot describe a community that refrains from evil and lovingly accepts their worldly suffering. Their outward behavior fits well with the ideal portrayal of the Essenes known from Josephus and Philo\u2014assuming, of course, one overlooks the doctrine of eternal hatred and vengeance to which they secretly adhered.<br \/>\nLike all Jewish movements, the Qumran community considered itself verus Israel, \u201cIsrael who walk in perfection\u201d (1QS 9.6). But when their hopes of gaining political power came to naught, the hope of being identified as the sum total of the Jewish people was dashed as well. Only when the sinning Israel will be destroyed, only, then, in the eschaton, will the Community alone remain as the true Israel. As a result, the destruction of all the nations of the world\u2014the main focus of the War Scroll\u2014is almost wholly absent from the other scrolls. The contrast between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness is limited, in practical terms, to sectarian hatred aimed at the rest of the Jewish people.<br \/>\nThe shift in the Yahad\u2019s attitude toward mainstream Judaism finds expression in the content of the term berit, covenant. The author of the War Scroll knows of a single covenant, the one God forged at Sinai with \u201ca nation of holy ones of the covenant\u201d (1QM 10.10): \u201cYou established a covenant with our fathers and ratified it with their offspring for times eternal\u201d (1QM 13.7\u20138). But in other scrolls, the word \u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea often signifies the teachings of the Sect, its rules and its commandments, to the exclusion of the remainder of the Jewish people: \u201cfor futile are all those who do not know the covenant\u201d (1QS 5.19). This covenant is the result of God\u2019s graceful selection of the Community, and so it is called \u201ca covenant of grace (\u05d1\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea \u05d7\u05e1\u05d3)\u201d (1QS 1.8). It is also referred to with the biblical eschatological name \u201cnew covenant\u201d (CD 6.19; 8.21; 1QpHab 2.3). True, this \u201cnew covenant\u201d does not\u2014as Christianity would have it\u2014nullify the old, but it is\u2014as it is for Christianity\u2014a sine qua non of salvation. The community of \u201cGod\u2019s chosen\u201d (1QpHab 10.13) has become a sect, in the technical sense of the word.<br \/>\nThe author of the War Scroll believed the members of the Community will ascend together from the desert of Jerusalem, seize the Temple, and their priests \u201cshall take their positions at the burnt offerings and the sacrifices, in order to prepare the pleasant incense of God\u2019s approval, to atone for all his congregation\u201d (1QM 2.5), but when this vision failed to materialize, there developed a severe religious and practical difficulty: the members of the Yahad believe the Temple to be defiled and presently not able to be purified. How, then, can they maintain their religious obligations toward God while distant from the impure Temple? Their answer was to represent the commandments and special purity restrictions of the Yahad as a full and satisfactory substitute for the Temple service in which they never participated. In their words: \u201cWhen these exist in Israel in accordance with these rules in order to establish the spirit of holiness in truth eternal, in order to atone for the guilt of iniquity and for the unfaithfulness of sin, and for approval for the earth, without the flesh of burnt offerings and without the fats of sacrifice\u2014the offering of the lips in compliance with the decree will be like the pleasant aroma of justice and the perfectness of behavior will be acceptable like a freewill offering\u201d (1QS 9.4\u20135). Indeed, the special commandments of the Qumran community are described as \u201cpleasing atonement\u201d (1QS 3.11). The men of the Yahad conclude that the defiled sanctuary in Jerusalem is not, in fact, the Temple\u2014rather, the sect itself is the true Temple: \u201cat that time the men of the Community shall set apart a holy house for Aaron, in order to form a most holy community, and a house for the Community for Israel, those who walk in perfection\u201d (1QS 9.5\u20136; see also 8.4\u201311; CD 3.19\u20134.4). The elevation of the Temple to a spiritual-mystical symbol is for the God-community of the Yahad a response to their distance from the actual Temple services. The elevation of the Yahad itself to the status of a spiritual Temple provides the conceptual underpinnings for the special role of the priests in the community. It is likely no coincidence that immediately following the words of 1QS cited above, there follows: \u201cOnly the sons of Aaron will have authority in the matter of judgment and of goods, and their word will be definitive\u201d (1QS 9.7).<\/p>\n<p>V<\/p>\n<p>The Essene psalmist who composed the Hodayot compares the men of the Yahad to \u201ctrees of life in the secret source, hidden among all the trees at the water\u201d (1QHa 16.5\u20136). The Community lives in hiding, set apart from the evil world that refuses to recognize it: \u201cHe who causes the holy shoot to grow in the true plantation hides, not considered, not known, its sealed mystery. But you, O God, you protect its fruit with the mystery of powerful heroes and spirits of holiness, so that the flame of the searing fire will not reach the spring of life, nor with the everlasting trees will it drink the waters of holiness, nor produce its fruit\u201d (1QHa 16.10\u201313). The small group of God\u2019s select sits in the Judean desert, adhering to its teachings and commandments, and abstaining from any activity \u201cuntil the time of your judgment\u201d (1QHa 6.4). For now, it is incumbent upon the Qumran community \u201cto take root before they grow and their roots extend to the gully\u201d (1QHa 16.7). They must drink the holy waters from the source of divine knowledge and immerse themselves in the wondrous secrets of God.<br \/>\nWhat were the challenges facing the men of the Yahad in those days? They delved deeply into the question of mankind, its natural baseness and the glory that God gracefully sets upon it. There emerged from within the Community the spiritual doctrine of man\u2019s election through divine grace, a doctrine that has so far been found only in the hymn appended to the Manual of Discipline and in the hymns of the Hodayot.<br \/>\nThe dualistic doctrine of Qumran asserted that there is a unity between the good and the pure, on one hand, and between the evil and the impure, on the other. The spirits of light engender \u201cgenerous compassion with all the sons of truth, of magnificent purity which detests all unclean idols\u201d (1QS 4.5), while to the spirit of deceit belong \u201cappalling acts performed in a lustful passion, filthy paths in the service of impurity\u201d (1QS 4.10). The same identification of impurity and sin is heard in the words of the War Scroll: \u201cAccursed be all the spirits of [Belial\u2019s] lot for their wicked plan, may they be damned for their deeds of filthy uncleanness\u201d (1QM 13.4\u20135).<br \/>\nLike most apocalyptic thinkers, the members of the Qumran community believed that the present days are governed by the forces of deceit, or, to use their dualistic phraseology, the current era is \u201call the days of Belial\u2019s dominion\u201d (1QS 2.19; 1.23; and see also CD 4.12\u201313; 6.14; 12.23; 1QpHab 5.7). In light of this, the Manual of Discipline concludes, that if the world is currently under the dominion of Belial and his lot\u2014the source of all impurity\u2014then the world itself is in the realm of impurity. The world \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for the judgment decided\u201d (1QS 4.19\u201320). Even mankind itself has been defiled in sin by the dominion of Belial, and will be restored only in the end of days, when the rule of evil is abolished. \u201cThen God will refine, with his truth, all man\u2019s deeds, and will purify for himself the structure of man, ripping out all spirit of injustice from the innermost part of his flesh, and cleansing him with the spirit of holiness from every wicked deed. He will sprinkle over him the spirit of truth like lustral water (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and (from) the defilement of the unclean spirit\u201d (1QS 4.20\u201322).<br \/>\nThe characterization of man as a creature who has been defiled by the dominion of Belial paves the way for a doctrine of mankind as inherently sinful and errant\u2014a doctrine that plays a central role both in the hymn appended to the Manual of Discipline and in the Hodayot. Man is no longer a creature that has become defiled, but \u201chuman uncleanness\u201d (1QS 11.14\u201315) and \u201ca sin of flesh\u201d (1QS 11.12). These are the congenital conditions of one born of woman: man is \u201ca creature of clay, fashioned with water, a foundation of shame and a source of impurity, an oven of iniquity and a building of sin, a spirit of error and depravity without knowledge\u201d (1QHa 9.21\u201323); a base creature, innately governed by its sinful urges for \u201cevery impure abomination and guilt of unfaithfulness\u201d (1QHa 19.11); a \u201cstructure of dust fashioned with water \u2026 shame of dishonor and source of impurity \u2026 and a depraved spirit rules over him\u201d (1QHa 5.21\u201322); \u201che is in iniquity from his maternal womb, and in guilt of unfaithfulness right to old age\u201d (1QHa 12.30). Disgust and revulsion in the face of man\u2019s nature, as well as disdain for human society, are typical of those who would negate the world and flee from it, and it is to this category that the Qumran community clearly belongs.<br \/>\nThe scrolls posit an unbridgeable gap between mankind and God, for \u201cTo you, God of knowledge, belong all the works of justice and the foundation of truth; but to the sons of Adam belong the service of iniquity and the deeds of deception\u201d (1QHa 9.26\u201327). Is there, then, a path of salvation for mankind from its own base and sinful nature? The members of God\u2019s elect community know \u201cthat there is hope for someone you fashioned out of dust for an everlasting community. The depraved spirit you have purified from great offense\u201d (1QHa 11.20, and see also 6.6; 9.14). God lifts up the man who desires him from his base destiny and purifies him of \u201cthe uncleanness of human being and from the sin of the sons of man\u201d (1QS 11.14\u201315). This is done by bestowing upon man the divine spirit, for \u201cthe path of man is not secure except by the spirit which God creates for him\u201d (1QHa 12.31). Indeed, God elevates his elect from the baseness of man to the sublime heights of the angels: \u201cFor the sake of your glory, you have purified man from offense, so that he can make himself holy for you from every impure abomination and guilt of unfaithfulness, to become united with the sons of your truth and in the lot with your holy ones, to raise the worms of the dead from the dust, to an everlasting community and from a depraved spirit to your knowledge, so that he can take his place in your presence with the perpetual host and the spirit \u2026 to renew him with everything that will exist and those who know in a community of jubilation\u201d (1QHa 19.10\u201314). Needless to say, not all people are granted the gift of purifying spirit. The dualistic doctrine of Qumran asserts that only part of humanity has been elected to be counted among the righteous\u2014and that part of humanity that God has chosen to purify of their defilement and sin is, of course, the members of the Yahad themselves.<br \/>\nMan is \u201ca creature of clay fashioned with water\u201d (1QHa 9.21) and \u201cunfaithful flesh\u201d (1QS 11.9), and only the gift of spirit can purify and redeem him. There is, then, a dichotomy between the material element of human existence and the purifying spirit. Yet it should be noted that there has not yet been found in the scrolls an explicit contrast between materiality as such\u2014or the material world\u2014and the spiritual realm of the divine, a division that typifies a strand of Greek thought beginning with Plato and down through the various Gnostic movements. The scrolls do not negate the world as such. True, the Manual of Discipline asserts that the world \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice\u201d (1QS 4.19), but it is not inherently a source of impurity. God established it as the place for the spirits of light and darkness (1QS 4.2), and even \u201ccreated man to rule the world\u201d (1QS 3.17\u201318). Moreover, the wondrous secrets of creation and the immutable laws governing the universe are proof of God\u2019s greatness and singular will (1QHa 9.7\u201320). Indeed, these laws of righteousness only serve to highlight the nullity of mankind (1QHa 9.21\u201327).<br \/>\nThe view expressed in the Hodayot and the Manual of Discipline, according to which man is a base, defiled and impure creature, is organically tied to the passive version of divine predestination. According to this doctrine, everything is determined in advance solely according to God\u2019s will, this being the sole source of all being, for \u201cby his knowledge everything shall come into being, and all that does exist he establishes with his calculations and nothing is done outside him\u201d (1QS 11.11). Thus, God has foreordained a particular individual to be righteous and one of God\u2019s elect, since from \u201c[God\u2019s] hand is the perfection of the path\u201d (1QS 11.10\u201311). It appears, then, that by the Community\u2019s account, man\u2019s corrupt nature prevents him from becoming righteous through his own agency, for man is a creature of \u201cevil and unfaithful flesh\u201d (1QS 11.9), and his works are bereft of value. Man is a base creature, helpless to raise himself up if not for God\u2019s will: \u201cI am dust and ashes, what can I plan if you do not wish it? What can I devise without your will? How can I be strong if you do not make me stand? How can I be learned if you do not mould me?\u201d (1QHa 18.5\u20137). When God\u2019s unique and absolute will decides to elevate one of his elect from the guilt and defilement that is otherwise his lot, when God decides to bridge the yawning chasm that divides him from helpless mankind, this divine judgment is not contingent upon human merit\u2014for indeed there is no such thing\u2014but rather upon the mercy and grace of the beneficent deity: \u201cI know that no one besides you is just. I have appeased your face by the spirit which you have placed in me, to lavish your kindnesses on your servant forever, to purify me with your holy spirit, to bring me near by your will according to the extent of your kindnesses\u201d (1QHa 8.19\u201321). The elect\u2019s knowledge that he has been blessed with God\u2019s grace, fills him with confidence and provides him with inner fortitude: \u201cBut when I remembered the strength of your hand and the abundance of your compassion I remained resolute and stood up; my spirit kept firmly in place in the face of affliction. For I leaned on your kindnesses and the abundance of your compassion. For you atone iniquity and cleanse man of his guilt through your justice\u201d (1QHa 12.35\u201337). The doctrine of man\u2019s election through preordained divine grace seeks to clarify the means by which an individual merits becoming one of the elect. It is a doctrine that reflects a religious sensibility that is concerned with individual salvation, which apparently dominated the Yahad at that time. According to this doctrine, the Community is the sum total of all the individual elect: \u201cAll the sons of your truth you bring to forgiveness in your presence, you purify them from their offences by the greatness of your goodness, and by the abundance of your compassion, to make them stand in your presence for ever and ever. For you are an eternal God and all your paths remain from eternity\u201d (1QHa 15.29\u201332). And similarly: \u201cFor I know that shortly you will raise a survivor among your people, a remnant in your inheritance. You will purify them to cleanse them of guilt. For all their deeds are in your truth and in your kindness you judge them with an abundance of compassion and a multitude of forgiveness. According to your mouth you teach them, and according to the correctness of your truth, to establish them in your council for your glory\u201d (1QHa 14.7\u201310). The Community, which is the only path to salvation, is not only the natural framework that encompasses all of God\u2019s elect; adherence to the Yahad and observance of its laws are a necessary condition of redemption. Thus, membership in this fellowship of grace is itself one of the gracious acts that God has bestowed upon his chosen ones: \u201cYou, you alone, have created the righteous man \u2026 to keep your covenant\u201d (1QHa 7.17\u201318). Indeed, the elect\u2019s recognition that it is the purifying holy spirit that beats in his heart as he is elevated \u201cfrom a depraved spirit to Your knowledge\u201d (1QHa 19.12), as well as the exoteric and esoteric doctrines of the Community\u2014to which the members wholly devote themselves\u2014all these are gracious acts of a beneficent God toward his elect: \u201cAnd your compassion for all the sons of your approval, for you have taught them the basis of your truth, and have instructed them in your wonderful mysteries\u201d (1QHa 19.9\u201310). In other words, the Community itself played a central role in the doctrine of God\u2019s gracious salvation of man. This doctrine is of course not contrary to the accepted views within the Yahad regarding the cosmic role of the \u201ccommunity of God\u201d in the processes that govern the universe, from its inception to its ultimate end, nor to the notion that the members of the Community will be handsomely rewarded in the end of days for their fidelity to the Yahad.<br \/>\nThe teaching that it is predestined divine grace that elevates one from the human impurity posits a sharp opposition between the vast majority of mankind, that is doomed, on the one hand, and the small number of elect who have been purified. Humanity is divided along a horizontal line, with a small group of individuals elevated above it through the will of God. This dichotomy is essentially different from the vertical division of the two camps facing off against one another\u2014the lot of God and the lot of Belial, the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness\u2014which is one of the key teachings of the War Scroll and of the Manual of Discipline. The Hodayot are aware of this division as well (see, e.g., 1QHa 7.17\u201332; 6.18\u201320), albeit in a much weaker form, as the doctrine of the individual\u2019s election out of the defiled state of mankind moves front and center. It is possible that the two doctrines of election are not, from a conceptual point of view, mutually exclusive, and thus may be found in conjunction. Another possibility is that the Qumranites reconciled the two doctrines by assuming that all of humanity is the lot of Belial, judging by its crooked ways, whereas only those purified of the \u201csins of mankind\u201d are of the lot of light.<br \/>\nThe scrolls published thus far bear witness to three distinct stages in the Dead Sea Community\u2019s doctrinal development. First, the division of the world into two hostile factions and the doctrine of predestination, which together served as the basis for bellicose activism (the War Scroll). Second, though the sect does not abdicate its activism altogether, it does postpone the destruction of the wicked to the more distant future and endorse a conditional pacifism. Their hatred of the surrounding society becomes \u201ceverlasting hatred \u2026 in the clandestine spirit,\u201d as they maintain a facade of slavish submission to the regnant world order. This new position is based on a doctrine of divine predestination in its passive version: since the \u201cultimate end\u201d has not yet come, members of the Yahad must not rebel against the will of God, but rather refrain from taking any action against the wicked (Manual of Discipline, Hodayot). Finally, there emerges a doctrine of man\u2019s predestined election out of a divine grace. This doctrine is based on the regnant views of the Yahad, that mankind is inherently defiled and sinful, and that the passive doctrine of predestination indicates that all human action is ultimately rooted in God\u2019s will (Hodayot, the hymn appended to the Manual of Discipline). It appears, then, that after the political conditions of the day forced the Community to relinquish its activist approach, they adapted their teachings to the new reality and settled for a hidden hatred toward surrounding society, while nursing a hope for their eventual triumph. In time, however, the sect became enclosed within itself, turned away from the great masses of humanity that are steeped in the \u201cimpurity of man, the sinfulness of mankind.\u201d Its members immersed themselves in the doctrine of man\u2019s election through divine grace, a doctrine that showed them the way to their personal salvation.<\/p>\n<p>2.      The Essene Worldview<\/p>\n<p>In 1950 I published an article in which I summarized my views of the Essenes. Since then, many additional Qumran texts have been published, as well as enlightening articles, but though new problems have arisen and altered the picture somewhat, the basic arguments remain pertinent today. The community that lived in Qumran was undoubtedly the Essenes, who are known to us from contemporary authors. When the study of the scrolls was in its infancy, Josephus was taken as the main guide to understanding their content. Today, the scrolls shed light on Josephus\u2019s statements about the Essenes. It seems two main questions must be raised: First, which of the Qumran texts were written by the Yahad itself, and which by members of the apocalyptic movement from which the Essenes emerged? Second, in what areas did this strict sect allow for flexibility in matters of doctrine? For there is no question that the Essenes were a \u201cdoctrinal collective\u201d that instituted a binding theological worldview. These are weighty questions, and absolute answers are hard to come by, among other reasons due to the fragmentary nature of the extant material.<br \/>\nThe composition of several apocryphal works can be located in the broad context out of which the Essene sect emerged, among them Jubilees, 1 Enoch, and the Testaments of the Patriarchs. There is also a composition that has been preserved in an early Christian text, Didache, which was also preserved independently in a Latin translation from Greek. Researchers have dubbed the text \u201cThe Two Ways.\u201d<br \/>\nI begin with a short discussion of \u201cThe Two Ways,\u201d which by all accounts is a Jewish text that has been incorporated into the Didache, and early Christian work from 100 C.E., approximately. Thus, \u201cThe Two Ways,\u201d whose original language is Greek, was written no later than the first century C.E. It opens:<\/p>\n<p>There are two ways in the world, one of life, the other of death, one of light, the other of darkness; upon them two angels are appointed, one of righteousness, the other of iniquity, and between the two ways there is a great difference. (1.1)<\/p>\n<p>The way of light is accompanied by fascinating ethical advice, while the way of darkness consists largely of an enumeration of sins. The author, of course, exhorts the reader to choose the path of life and avoid sin. The image of two ways is familiar from the Greeks, and is also attested in rabbinic literature. The dualism of this image fits well with the Essene spiritual worldview, but is at odds with the doctrine of predestination that is characteristic of the Essenes, according to which it is God who creates the righteous and the wicked. According to the doctrine of double predestination, the scope of human decision is extremely narrow, whereas the image of the two ways seeks to demonstrate to the reader that he has the freedom to choose between the way of life and the way of death. According to Rabbi Aqiva, this very decision was put to the first human: \u201cGod put before him two ways, the way of life and the way of death, and he chose for himself the way of death.\u201d<br \/>\nAs noted, this is the opening image of the tractate \u201cThe Two Ways,\u201d which has been preserved in the Christian Didache. The phrase cited above is similar to the well-known theological discussion in the Manual of Discipline (3.13\u20134.36), though there the goal is different: the theology seeks to provide a conceptual foundation for the Essene doctrine of double predestination, whereas the opening of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d holds that man must decide for himself which of the ways he chooses.<br \/>\nStill, there is no question that \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d exhibits literary ties to the theological tractate in 1QS, as a comparative analysis readily reveals. Here we find that translating the Greek of Didache 3.7\u20138 yields a statement identical to that of 1QS 4.3: \u201cIt is a spirit of meekness, of patience, generous compassion, eternal goodness.\u201d Not only is the terminology identical, they are listed in the same order. Thus there is clear evidence for the literary dependence of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d on the Manual of Discipline. How, then, can we explain this literary dependence, on the one hand, and the theological differences, on the other?<br \/>\nThe answer to this question appears to lie in the fact that the author of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d possessed an earlier version of the Manual of Discipline, in which the doctrine of double predestination\u2014so central to the worldview of the Qumran Community\u2014had not yet been inserted. According to Josephus, the Essenes believed \u201cthat Fate is mistress of all things, and that nothing befalls men unless it be in accordance with her decree\u201d (AJ 13.172, and see also 18.18). Along the same lines we find the statement in the Manual of Discipline: \u201cFrom the God of knowledge stems all there is and all there shall be. Before they existed he established their entire design. And when they have come into being, at their appointed time, they will execute all their works according to his glorious design, without altering anything\u201d (1QS 3.15\u201316).<br \/>\nThe starting point of our analysis is the dictum of Rabbi Aqiva, cited above. According to his view, already the first human was given the choice between two ways\u2014a choice subsequently given to each and every human being: the way of life or the way of death. We may hypothesize that this was the original version of the theological tractate in the Manual of Discipline, before the Essene editor reworked it to fit the doctrine of predestination. The original wording no doubt stated that man must decide whether to walk in the path of righteousness, or in the path of wickedness. The image of two ways was not excised from the Manual of Discipline altogether, but now the decision which path to follow is no longer a matter of human choice, but of divine predestination. The editor made a number of textual changes, in order to promote his own position. It is possible that the hypothetical original version included a statement about the first human being presented with the choice between the two ways. The matter becomes clearer if we compare the extant version with the hypothetical original:<\/p>\n<p>1QS 3.17\u201321<br \/>\nHe created humanity (\u05d0\u05e0\u05d5\u05e9) to rule the world<br \/>\nAnd placed for him two spirits so that he would walk with them \u2026<br \/>\nThey are the spirits of truth and of deceit \u2026<br \/>\nIn the hand of the Prince of Lights is dominion over all the sons<br \/>\nof justice;<br \/>\nThey walk on paths of light.<br \/>\nAnd in the hand of the Angel of Darkness is total dominion<br \/>\nover the sons of deceit;<br \/>\nThey walk on paths of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>Reconstruction of the Earlier Version<\/p>\n<p>He created man (\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd) to rule the world<br \/>\nAnd placed for him two ways so that he would walk with them \u2026<br \/>\nThey are the ways of truth and of deceit \u2026<br \/>\nIn the hand of the Prince of Lights is the way of justice;<br \/>\nThose who choose it walk on paths of light.<br \/>\nAnd in the hand of the Angel of Darkness is the way of deceit;<br \/>\nThose who choose it walk on paths of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>There is also a striking similarity between \u201cfor God has sorted them into equal parts \u2026 since they cannot walk together\u201d in the Manual of Discipline (4.16\u201318) and the opening statement of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d (cited above).<br \/>\nI have no doubt that the earlier version of the theological tractate in the Manual of Discipline originally stated that God \u201ccreated man [and not just \u2018humanity\u2019] to rule the world\u201d (3.17), since that is the language used in Genesis 1:26\u201328. Thus we learn\u2014and not only from Rabbi Aqiva\u2019s dictum\u2014that God placed two ways in which to walk before the first human. It is hard to say what the (whole) theological tractate looked like before the Essene revision brought it in line with their doctrine of predestination. Irrespective, I have shown elsewhere, that the four terms that appear in the Manual of Discipline appear in the same order in \u201cThe Two Ways.\u201d It stands to reason, then, that the author of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d knew, at least, the earlier version of 1QS 4.2\u201314, which includes the two opposing lists of the ways of light (4.2\u20138) and the ways of the wicked (4.9\u201314). These two lists served as paradigms for his parallel lists.<br \/>\nClearly, then, the doctrine of double predestination was the grand innovation of the Qumran community, as it crystallized into a sect with its particular doctrines, thus distinguishing itself from the broader apocalyptic movement. The conditions for such a move had appeared earlier. The literary works produced by this apocalyptic movement\u2014e.g., 1 Enoch, Jubilees, the Testament of the Patriarchs\u2014clearly emphasize the dualism of good and evil, both in the mortal world and in the world of the angels and spirits. These texts also record \u2018Belial\u2019 and \u2018the Prince of Depravity\u2019 (\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d4\u05de\u05e9\u05d8\u05de\u05d4) as epithets for the devil. Finally, they mention a community of God\u2019s elect that does not include the People of Israel as a whole.<br \/>\nThese matters are more or less well established. In my opinion, we can further state with relative confidence that certain Qumran scrolls or compositions were written by the Essenes\u2014using criteria not limited to the doctrine of predestination. It is much more complicated to determine which of these are purely sectarian works, and which have their origins in the circles that were close to the Essene sect. After all, even if a certain text or a certain passage does not reflect Essene ideology or terminology, this does not mean that it does not belong to the sectarian corpus; Essene authors were not required to demonstrate their adherence to the sect\u2019s teachings in every word they wrote.<br \/>\nThe publication of Qumran fragments over the last several decades has made apparent the need to rethink the nature and scope of groups that grew along the periphery of the sect, because they refused to accept its government and its doctrine of predestination, in all its severity. It is quite possible that John the Baptist and his movement were situated on the margins of the Qumran community. It is also possible that both the Testament of the Patriarchs and \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d were composed on the margins of the sect, and grew out of a polemic with its teachings, particularly predestination and the Essene interpretation of shared property.<br \/>\nWhile the Testament of the Patriarchs and \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d were composed, in Greek, on the margins of the Qumran community, they are based on sources that belong to the broader movement from which the Essene sect emerged. In any case, it appears these compositions date to before the establishment of the sect. Our analysis of \u201cThe Two Ways\u201d clearly indicates that it is rooted in a pre-Essene version of the theological treatise within the Manual of Discipline. As for the Testament of the Patriarchs, it is possible that it too is based on earlier sources, since an earlier version of the Testament of Judah was one of the sources of the Book of Jubilees. The two cases at hand are typical of the crystallization of new religious movements, as well as movements in politics and philosophy. A new movement emerging from an existing framework will often turn to an earlier literary stratum of the mother movement. The use of earlier material, then, does not contradict the assertion that we are dealing with the periphery of the Essene sect.<br \/>\nThis is not the place for an in-depth exploration of the question of messianic hopes and the figure of the messiah or, more accurately, the three messiahs: the offspring of the house of David, the high priest of the end of days, and the prophet identified in rabbinic literature as Elijah. The hopes for three messiahs were not limited to the sect. Already in 1 Maccabees, as part of the \u2018appointment letter\u2019 given by the Jewish people to Simon, the son of Mattathias, we find three roles critical to the proper functioning of the \u201cState of Israel\u201d: Simon will be \u201ctheir leader and high priest forever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise\u201d (1 Macc 14:41). The absent element is the renewal of the prophetic office, but this need is filled\u2014according to the Hasmonean faithful\u2014in the days of John Hyrcanus, Simon\u2019s son. He united the three offices, being the political leader of Israel, the high priest, and a prophet (AJ 13.209, and see BJ 1.68).<br \/>\nThe belief in three messiahs found its way into Christianity as well, and its harbingers may be evident in the gospels. Already the Ebionites, a Jewish-Christian sect, held that the person of Jesus encompassed all three roles: the king, the high priest, and the prophet. The same idea appears in the writings of Eusebius, who adduces biblical prooftexts to show that the epithet \u2018messiah\u2019 (\u05de\u05e9\u05d9\u05d7, anointed one) is applied to kings, prophets, and high priests. The notion that Jesus is king, prophet, and high priest, made its way from Catholic theology to one of the leaders of the Protestant Reformation, John Calvin, and became one of the fundaments of Protestant doctrine. Thus, a Jewish idea attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls became one of the most important motifs in Christian theology.<br \/>\nAs noted, 1 Maccabees states that the people bestowed upon Simon the son of Mattathias both political power and the high priesthood, \u201cuntil a trustworthy prophet should arise.\u201d The phrase \u201ctrustworthy prophet\u201d was used by the Ebionites in reference to Jesus, while the Sages emphasized the messianic king, the \u201cson of David.\u201d Both the prophet, Elijah, and the righteous priest were relegated by the Sages to the margins of their messianic expectations. Both the Essenes, and the broader movement from which they emerged, elevated the importance of the eschatological priest. For the Qumran community, like the Testament of the Patriarchs, priesthood is greater than kingship. This axiology is evident in the lofty status of priests within the sect, a sect whose founder, the Teacher of Righteousness, was himself a priest. Indeed, in a number of texts\u2014both in the scrolls and in the Testament of Levi\u2014the eschatological priest is elevated to super-human stature.<br \/>\nI have mentioned the important contribution of the recently published texts to our understanding of Qumran\u2019s eschatological doctrine. These texts emphasize the super-human aspect of the priest at the end of days. Of course, in this area as well, progress yields new questions. True, it stands to reason that the Qumran community believed that the eschatological priest will be one of their own Sons of Zadok, and it is possible that they once thought that the Messiah of the House of Aaron is the Teacher of Righteousness or, perhaps, his heir, the Interpreter of the Law. But how can this hope be reconciled with the midrash on Melchizedek uncovered among the fragments? There is no reason to assume that this work refers to an angel named Melchizedek. Clearly this Melchizedek is described as playing a role very similar to that of the Messiah of the House of Aaron, except that Melchizedek cannot be a scion to this house since he lived before Aaron. It is also evident that the superhuman descriptions of the eschatological priest in the scrolls and the Testament of Levi, and of Melchizedek in his eponymous scroll, are similar to the descriptions of the \u2018son of man\u2019 in the apocalyptic literature. That said, the Qumran scrolls have yet to yield a single explicit reference to the \u2018son of man.\u2019 This is doubly perplexing if we consider that John the Baptist, who was close to the Essenes, hoped for the advent of the \u2018son of man,\u2019 as the Gospels of Matthew and Luke plainly attest.<br \/>\nWe may assume that there was no uniformity of opinion among the members of the Qumran community with regard to the details of their eschatological doctrine. It is possible that strict discipline was not enforced, and that the sect did not consider significant disagreements in this area. Still, the most important shift may occur in the study of early Christianity, more specifically, in the question of Jesus\u2019 own messianic consciousness. Some Christian scholars have denied he had any messianic consciousness, assuming that the church invented this doctrine after Jesus\u2019 death. The Qumran texts that have been published of late suggest that the idea of a super-human messianic figure circulated in Jewish apocalyptic circles long before Jesus\u2019 time. In truth, rabbinic Judaism never accepted this messianic mythology, and Jesus himself belonged, ultimately, to Pharisaic-Rabbinic Judaism. But Jesus was not a pure Pharisee, and he had access to the mythological aspects of Jewish apocalypticism, particularly with regard to the role of the messiah\u2014no doubt under Essene influence. Now, with the publication of the new Qumran fragments, it is no longer possible to assert that this \u201cChristology\u201d was created by the church after Jesus\u2019 tragic death, since these motifs circulated prior to his death.<br \/>\nIf we wish to make progress in this fascinating field, we must refresh our questions, and cast anew a critical eye on the synoptic gospels, which are, of course, our primary source of information concerning the historical Jesus.<\/p>\n<p>3.      The Economic Ideology of Qumran<\/p>\n<p>The present article is concerned with the famous Dead Sea community, fragments of whose library\u2014including a number of complete scrolls\u2014were discovered in the caves of Qumran. There is no question that the group in question is the Essenes, one of the three Jewish schools of the Second Temple period, who are discussed in the works of Josephus Flavius and Philo of Alexandria, the famous Jewish philosopher. It is relatively easy to prove that the Qumranites were the Essenes, both as a matter of overall identification, and in a detailed and minute investigation. One of the criteria for this identification is the presence of two key doctrines in the Dead Sea Scrolls that are cited as Essene by Josephus. I am referring to the doctrine of double predestination, and the demand of every member to share his property.<br \/>\nI begin with a discussion of double predestination, a religious-philosophical doctrine with important ramifications for the economic ideology of Qumran. The concept of free will is widely held to be one of the great achievements of Judaism\u2014without entering into the complications that arise from the juxtaposition of free will and a single, omniscient God that governs all. I must admit that I too have a difficult time imagining a form of Judaism that does not maintain a mutual dialogue between mankind and its creator. However, we must bear in mind the logical difficulties alluded to just now: how can man possess free will when God knows everything and determines the course of events? This is not the place to enter into this discussion, but the issue is important inasmuch as it may help us to understand the position of divine predestination, which radically limits or even negates man\u2019s free choice. This was the position of the Essenes at Qumran. Josephus discusses the Essene doctrine of divine predestination, and we find explicit discussion of it in the Dead Sea Scrolls themselves. According to Josephus, the three Jewish schools of his day were divided on this matter. As noted, the Essenes believed in an absolute divine predetermination: man is helpless in the face of God\u2019s decrees. The Pharisees\u2014who fathered Rabbinic Judaism in its development from its origins to the present\u2014accepted the idea of divine providence, but held that man is, in some sense, God\u2019s partner. That is, mankind is given the power to influence and even alter events, in accordance with his behavior\u2014be it through repentance and good deeds, or through his transgressions. The Sadducees, the third group, took a completely different tack, arguing that any divine supervision is extraneous, since man is responsible for his deeds and for the ensuing results.<br \/>\nOne of the conceptual difficulties that arise from the doctrine of absolute divine predestination, involves the existence of evil\u2014a problem that is found in more or less acute versions in any religious system that includes divine providence. If everything comes into being in accordance with God\u2019s will, must we not conclude that the good and beneficent God is also the author of evil? The Qumran scrolls not only failed to resolve this difficulty, but repeatedly asserted that God had indeed created evil, as well as wicked and sinful people. That is, they established a dualistic system, according to which the world is emphatically divided into good and evil, and there exists a camp of evil spirits, headed by Belial, the Prince of Darkness, and all this is in accordance with God\u2019s will! Alongside the doctrine of divine predestination, the Essenes maintained a radical dualism that divides humanity into the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. The combination of predestination and dualism is referred to in scholarly discourse as the doctrine of double predestination. Incidentally, this teaching is not limited to the Qumran community, but found its way into certain Christian groups who were apparently influenced by the Essene theology on this point.<br \/>\nBefore we come to the economic ideology of the Dead Sea community, we must first indicate a number of conclusions that follow from their theological worldview. Evil will not, of course, endure. According to the scrolls, God has placed eternal enmity between the faction of righteousness and the faction of evil, and in the end of days there will be a war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness, at the conclusion of which the wicked will be destroyed, and with them the dominion of darkness. This war, which was described in detail in a unique text published by the late Yigael Yadin, will last forty years, and in its course the Sons of Light will conquer the entire world. The enemies to be annihilated are not only the nations of the world, but the members of the Jewish people that refuse to accept the ways of the Qumran sect. Indeed, the scrolls clearly hold that Israel itself is divided into the Sons of Light, God\u2019s elect, and the Sons of Darkness.<br \/>\nEven before the discovery of the scrolls, there were scholars who argued that the Essene doctrine of double predestination served as a conceptual grounding for their sense that they and only they are God\u2019s elect. In other words, their theology was forged in order to justify their sense of superiority, and their tendency to break off from Jewish society as a whole. And indeed, the scrolls repeatedly emphasize the chasm that lies between them and the rest of the Jewish people. The members of the Community are referred to as the chosen ones of God, while the rest of the Jewish people are sinners. But, according to the scrolls, the separatist tendency of the Sons of Light is not only a question of theoretical worldview, nor merely a way of distinguishing a political-religious group from the other factions of the day. The Essenes, who considered themselves God\u2019s elect, expressed their unique character through a sectarian lifestyle, characterized by a rigid communal structure and special ordinances, attested both in Josephus\u2019s account of the Essenes and in the Qumran scrolls themselves, particularly in the Manual of Discipline. According to both Josephus and Philo, the sect numbered some forty thousand full members, but its ideological and theological influence on the Jewish people as a whole was great.<br \/>\nBoth Josephus and Philo point to the uniquely Essene practice of shared wealth, what effectively amounts to the abolition of private property. This is a well-established fact, and need not detain us here. It is significant that communal property is attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls. This is not the place for an extended discussion of the sources, but I will cite two brief passages: \u201cAll those who submit freely to His truth will convey all their knowledge, their energies, and their riches to the Community of God\u201d (1QS 1.11\u201312); \u201c[the initiate\u2019s] possessions and his earnings will also be joined at the hand of the Inspector of the earnings of the Many\u201d (1QS 6.19\u201320). The ancient authorities mentioned above, as well as the scrolls, provide a wealth of information about the precise nature of this communal property, as well as the role of the Inspector.<br \/>\nThe idea of shared wealth played an important role in the overall ideology of the Dead Sea Community. Analysis of this unique phenomenon reveals that it is linked to broader economic issues in the sect\u2019s worldview. Indeed, there is a causal connection between the Essene doctrine of shared wealth, on the one hand, and their religious, social, and political teachings, on the other. A thorough discussion of the rich and varied ramifications of this Essene doctrine may shed light on the mutual influences of economics, religion, and politics in other groups, during other times, living under different circumstances.<br \/>\nOne approach to the Essenes\u2019 shared wealth is from parallel groups in Christian sects that existed from those days down to the present. This phenomenon, which appears time and again in the Christian world, has its origins in the Essene teachings. Indeed, today it is evident that the Essenes had a considerable impact on all the movement within early Christianity, as it emerged in the late Second Temple period. The sources indicate that communal property was instituted in the Jerusalem Church, as described in Acts 2:44\u201345, a description that spawned many imitations among radical Christian communities in the Middle Ages and modern era. To my knowledge, the first of these were the Hussites, in 15th century Bohemia, whose center was the city Tabor. Over time, other Christian sects emerged that adopted a life of shared wealth, particularly in the United States and Canada. I spent time on a Canadian agricultural sectarian commune, among other reasons to learn how shared property works in religious communities, in the hopes of learning about the life of the Essenes and the ideological issues that emerge from such communities. There are those who argue that these non-Jewish agricultural communes influenced the kibbutz movement in its infancy. If so, it appears that the roots of the kibbutz phenomenon lead back to the Dead Sea community. In any case, there is evident and understandable interest among the kibbutzim in the Essene sect, interest that predates the discovery of the scrolls.<br \/>\nUnlike the Israeli kibbutzim, the members of the Canadian agricultural commune knew nothing about the organization of the ancient Essenes. Strikingly, these Canadians, who lived according to a strict code enjoining shared property, developed an ideology similar to that of the Qumran community. Thus, for example, they had to face the problem of economic ties with the outside world. For them, as for the Essenes, such ties were, of course, necessary, but were restricted to certain staff members. Similarly, the Essenes placed outside economic ties under the jurisdiction of the inspectors, already mentioned above, who were charged primarily with the economic life of the community.<br \/>\nClearly, any group that adopts the principle of shared property will experience some tension with the outside world and its different customs. The members of the Canadian commune, and other groups like it or affiliated with it, saw outsiders as erring, almost lost, since they did not possess the proper belief. And they, like the ancient Essenes, felt themselves clearly superior to the outsiders, God\u2019s only select, who are promised a place in the world to come. Shared property creates a social and an ideological separatism, an ideology that finds robust expression in the Qumran texts.<br \/>\nI hope it is now clear why I had to preface the present topic with a discussion of the Essene dualism of light and darkness and their doctrine of double predestination. They believed that they were selected by God, from the very beginning of time, to be his chosen ones, to confront the others\u2014including the rest of the Jewish world\u2014who are nothing more than the Sons of Darkness, doomed to eternal infamy. The Qumran scrolls demonstrate the integral role of shared property in the worldview of the sect.<br \/>\nI could explore in some detail the conceptual and practical links between the high level of ritual purity enforced at Qumran and the sharing of property. Anyone familiar with the Talmudic sources knows the different levels of ritual purity Jews could adopt, be it as individuals or as groups, each according to his choice. But for those who do not know these texts, suffice it to say that the highest level of ritual purity distinguished the Essenes from the rest of the Jewish people, whom they considered impure. Shared property probably assisted them in maintaining their purity.<br \/>\nPhilo notes that sharing property helped the sect avoid a raft of social problems. They did not have rich and poor members, since all could live in peace from the common wealth. That was the economic reality. From an ideological perspective, however, shared property entailed an idealization of poverty and a concurrent disdain for wealth. In this too the Essenes were not unique, though it is certainly not the case that all communal groups share this view. It is certainly possible that resistance to economic oppression and to the growing ranks of the newly rich, quite prevalent in those days, was among the catalysts for the formation of the Qumran community. In any case, in seeing poverty as a full-fledged religious ideal and disparaging wealth, the Essenes parted ways with the wealthy Sadducees and with the Pharisees, the progenitors of rabbinic Judaism. This is not to suggest, of course, that the sages loved riches and supported the accumulation of wealth; they were, after all, committed to social justice. But it is evident that they do not view poverty as a desirable trait or a religious ideal, but rather a defect that should be minimized to the extent possible, through the institution of decrees and regulations, as well as though charity and acts of loving-kindness. The Essenes, in casting poverty as a religious ideal and disparaging wealth, influenced certain movements within Christianity, an influence that is evident already in the teachings of its founder.<br \/>\nThe discussion thus far clearly suggests that the Jewish sect whose writings were discovered in the Dead Sea region was, to use a modern terminology, a group of radical revolutionaries\u2014a characterization it shares with other, non-Jewish communities, that embraced poverty and adopted the principle of shared property. The Essene resistance to economic oppression\u2014not only aimed at Jews, but also the oppression of gentiles at the hands of the last of the Maccabee rulers\u2014aroused their interest in the social and political changes occurring in their world. As a result, the members of the sect and its authors became aware of the social injustices perpetuated by various kingdoms, and particularly the Roman empire, whose greed drove them to conquer kingdoms and enslave whole nations. Among the scrolls are a number of texts that provide invaluable information concerning the negative aspects of Roman imperialism.<br \/>\nThe present context allows for only a brief discussion of Qumran\u2019s economy and broader worldview. My primary intent was to introduce the reader to the great contribution made by the Qumran scrolls to our understanding of Second Temple Judaism, and to the general character of the Dead Sea community.<br \/>\nFrank Moore Cross and Esther Eshel have recently published a Qumran text that is relevant to the present discussion. According to the publishers, this text, which was composed in Jericho in the first half of the first century C.E., records the declaration of one Honi ben Elazar that he is contributing to the Qumran community (the Yahad) his property, including a house in Holon, fig and olive trees, and his servant named Hisdai. It appears to be the contribution of the initiate to the sect, \u2018anyone from Israel who freely volunteers\u2019 in the idiom of the scrolls (1QS 6.13), following his first probationary year. At the end of his second probationary year, his property will be sold and the proceedings channeled to the common fund of the community, thus marking the initiate\u2019s acceptance into the sect and elevation to status of member (see 1QS 6.18\u201324). The newly discovered text provides external proof for the basic historical reliability of the initiation process to another Second Temple Jewish sect, namely the description found in Acts 4:34: \u201cThere was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold.\u201d It should be noted that the practice of shared property was an innovation found among Jesus\u2019 disciples in the Jerusalem church. According to the gospels, neither the community that formed around Jesus during his lifetime, nor the followers of John the Baptist, adopted the principle of shared property\u2014contrary to the contemporary practice at Qumran. This appears, then, to be a case of Essene influence on the followers of Jesus, influence that became evident only after his death.<\/p>\n<p>4.      Medicine and Qumran<\/p>\n<p>Dedicated to Prof. Abraham (Teddy) Weiss<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom of Ben Sira, which was composed at or around 185 B.C.E., contains a beautiful chapter in which Ben Sira praises doctors and the science of medicine (38:1\u201315). He is referring to conventional medicine, not some \u201calternative\u201d medicine, though the latter was very common in the ancient world, so much so that it was difficult to distinguish between \u201cconventional\u201d medicine and medicine that involved exorcism and spirits. This distinction will become clearer in a moment, when we examine the medicine practiced in the Essene sect, which has rightly been identified as the group that lived at Qumran. Following the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, it became evident that this famous community grew out of a broader apocalyptic movement. This community composed a number of literary works, including Jubilees (from the second century B.C.E.), the texts that make up 1 Enoch, a rough contemporary of Jubilees that displays a great deal of similarity from a literary and other perspectives, in its literary and religious aspects, and the scroll known as the Genesis Apocryphon, discovered at Qumran.<br \/>\nWe begin with Josephus\u2019 account of the Essenes (BJ 2.136). He writes that they \u201cdisplay an extraordinary interest in the writings of the ancients, singling out in particular those which make for the welfare of soul and body; with the help of these, and with a view to the treatment of diseases, they make investigations into medicinal roots and properties of stones.\u201d Concerning the benefits and risks of different stones, this was an ancient view that still has its adherents today. For instance, the amethyst was thought to protect against inebriation\u2014indeed, the name a-methyst is Greek for \u2018no inebriation.\u2019<br \/>\nWhat were the ancient texts from which the Essenes learned to cure illnesses? The Essenes undoubtedly possessed the Book of Cures that Noah supposedly passed down to his son, Shem. We learn of such a \u2018Noah Book\u2019 from Jubilees (10.1\u201314), Hebrew fragments of which were uncovered in the Qumran caves. According to Jubilees, one of the angels taught Noah how to heal all diseases, so that he might use the plants of the earth to cure them: \u201cAnd the healing of all their illnesses together with their seductions we told Noah so that he might heal by means of herbs of the earth. And Noah wrote everything in a book just as we taught him according to every kind of healing \u2026 and he gave everything which he wrote to Shem, his oldest son\u201d (Jubilees 10.12\u201313). It is striking that this chapter has a rough parallel in the introduction to Sefer Assaf ha-Rofe (\u2018The Book of Assaf, the Healer\u2019) and scholars have not been able to explain how this account found its way into a medieval Hebrew book.<br \/>\nThere was a strong similarity between Essene medicine and the various exorcisms which were borderline witchcraft and prohibited to Jews. There is no question that the people in the movement from which the Essene sect emerged were aware of the ambivalence in these areas of medicine. Nonetheless, the Book of Enoch tells of the wicked sons of angels that \u201ctook wives for themselves from all they chose\u201d (Gen. 6:2), and taught mankind \u201cmagical medicine, incantations, the cutting of roots, and plants\u201d (Enoch 7.1; 8.3). If so, the very same herbal cures found among the Essenes, and which are described in Jubilees (10.1\u201314) and the gift of an angel (Raphael the Healer) to Noah, are described in the Book of Enoch together with incantations, as part of the deleterious teachings the wicked angels passed on to mankind.<br \/>\nThe Genesis Apocryphon, which was composed in Aramaic, speaks of the great afflictions (column 20, based on Genesis 12:17) that were visited upon Pharaoh because of Abraham\u2019s wife, Sarai. Pharaoh asked Abraham to pray for him, \u201cand he laid his hands upon him.\u201d And when Sarai was returned to him, Abraham prayed for Pharaoh and laid his hands upon his head.<br \/>\nThe biblical account does not mention Abraham laying his hands on Pharaoh\u2019s head. Indeed, this mode of healing is not mentioned in the entire Bible, nor in the Talmud. This healing practice is known from the stories of Jesus. And now we find in a Jewish text, composed before Jesus (and which contains not a trace of Christianity), evidence that the Essenes themselves used to heal the sick by the laying on of hands. Thus, the Dead Sea Scrolls have enriched our knowledge of the history of this alternative medical practice.<\/p>\n<p>5.      A Pre-Gnostic Concept in the Dead Sea Scrolls<\/p>\n<p>Dedicated to my friend, Shlomo Pines<\/p>\n<p>Upon the discovery of its literature, the Dead Sea community became a leading candidate to be one of the important forerunners of the Gnostic worldview, in light of its unique ideology. Like the various Gnostic movements, the Dead Sea Scrolls emphasize the secrecy of its doctrines, while maintaining a starkly dualistic approach to humanity and the world, a world that it pessimistically views as given to the dominion of darkness. The Qumran worldview is also similar to Gnosticism in its firm belief that, in the end, \u201cwhen those born of sin are locked up, evil will disappear before justice as darkness disappears before light. As smoke vanishes, and no longer exists, so will evil vanish forever. And justice will be revealed like the sun which regulates the world.\u2026 And knowledge will pervade the world, and there will never be folly there\u201d (1Q27 [1QMysteries] 1.5\u20137). And yet, these traits, while unquestionably significant, do not prove that this Jewish sect contained a set of ideas that could serve as the raw material for the creation of a Gnostic myth. I believe I have found in one of the scrolls evidence for a concept that could pave the way for an explicitly Gnostic notion, but may also be understood as following from the sect\u2019s own worldview. Still, the concept in question is somewhat atypical of Qumran\u2019s mainstream ideology, and as such holds particular interest.<br \/>\nThe Qumran community believed that this interesting and unique concept exists\u2014in nuce and only if interpreted as a cosmic or meta-historical statement\u2014in the prophecy of Habakkuk: \u201cThe Torah becomes slack and justice never emerges in victory. The wicked surround the righteous\u2014therefore justice emerges perverted\u201d (Hab. 1:4). Needless to say, it is certainly possible to interpret this verse in the manner of the Pesharim, as referring to the sacred history of the sect. This is, indeed, the approach of Pesher Habakkuk: \u201cSo the Torah becomes slack [The interpretation of this is] that they have rejected the Law of God. The wicked surround the righteous [Its interpretation: the wicked is the Wicked Priest and the righteous] is the Teacher of Righteousness \u2026\u201d (1QpHab 1.10\u201313). Despite its fragmentary nature, it is clear that we are dealing with a concrete, historically grounded interpretation: the righteous is identified with the Teacher of Righteousness, while the wicked who pursues him is the Wicked Priest.<br \/>\nThe Manual of Discipline offers a completely different reading of this very verse (1QS 4.19\u201321), but before turning to discuss this new mode of interpretation, we must first cite Matthew 12:18\u201321. Immediately prior to this passage\u2014a citation from Isaiah 42:1\u20134\u2014we are told that Jesus ordered those present not to make known his healing. This prohibition is offered \u201cto fulfill what had been spoken through the prophet Isaiah\u201d (Matt. 12:17), and then Matthew cites Isaiah\u2019s prophecy regarding the Lord\u2019s servant, that he \u201cwill not cry or lift up his voice, nor make it heard in the street\u201d (Isa. 42:2). The connection between the story and the prooftext is fairly flimsy, and it stands to reason that the Greek editor reworked the passage before inserting it into Matthew\u2019s narrative. The critical point for our investigation is that Matthew 12:20 quotes Isaiah as saying that the servant will not cry out \u201c\u2026 until justice emerges in victory (\u05e2\u05d3 \u05d9\u05e6\u05d9\u05d0 \u05dc\u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 \u05de\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8),\u201d but in fact Isaiah 42:4 reads \u201c\u2026 until he has established justice on the earth\u201d (\u05e2\u05d3 \u05d9\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05d0\u05e8\u05e5 \u05de\u05e9\u05e4\u05d8). Clearly, then, we have here a composite of two priestly teachings: those of Isaiah, and those of Habakkuk, who proclaims \u201cand justice never emerges in victory\u201d (Hab 1:4). The juxtaposition is probably due to the similarity between Habakkuk\u2019s words and Isaiah\u2019s statements that the Lord\u2019s servant \u201cwill bring forth justice to the nations\u201d (42:1) and \u201cwill bring forth justice in truth\u201d (42:3). It seems, moreover, that this fertile cross-pollination between Isaiah 42:1\u20134 and Habakkuk 1:4 is found in two other passages in the scrolls, to be discussed below (though this does not necessarily indicate the juxtaposition originated in the scrolls). For now it should be noted that both according to Matthew 12:18\u201321 and the two passages in the other scrolls, Habakkuk 1:4 will undergo a profound transformation in the end of days: Habakkuk states that \u201cjustice never emerges in victory\u201d because evil has dominion over the world; this is also the reason that \u201cjustice emerges perverted.\u201d In the end of days, however, a great change will occur in our world, and then \u201cjustice will prevail\u201d indeed. Both the scrolls and Matthew anchor this hope in the contrast between Habakkuk\u2019s \u201cjustice never emerges in victory\u201d (1:4) and Isaiah\u2019s description of the Lord\u2019s servant who \u201cwill bring forth justice to the nations\u201d (42:1) and \u201cwill bring forth justice in truth\u201d (42:3).<br \/>\nAs noted, Matthew\u2019s citation (12:18\u201321) of Isaiah 42:1\u20134 reads \u201cuntil justice prevails forever\u201d (12:20), rather than \u201cwill bring forth justice in truth\u201d (42:3), and this change is due to the influence of Habakkuk 1:4. Interestingly, the word \u2018truth,\u2019 that is missing in Matthew, plays a key role in the two parallel passages from Qumran. The first is found in 1QHa 12.24\u201325, where the poet\u2014one of the leaders of the sect\u2014addresses God, saying:<\/p>\n<p>Those who walk on the path of your heart have listened to me;<br \/>\nThey have aligned themselves before you in the council of the<br \/>\nholy ones.<br \/>\nYou will bring forth their justice,<br \/>\nAnd truth for the righteous.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that the latter half of this quote combines Habakkuk\u2019s statement \u201cjustice never emerges in victory\u201d (1:4), with Isaiah\u2019s \u201cwill bring forth justice in truth\u201d (42:3). Thus, the parallelism equates \u2018truth\u2019 and \u2018justice\u2019. As the context clearly indicates, the leader of the sect is expressing his firm belief that God will indeed save the members of the community from the plottings of its enemies. It is, of course, possible that some of the motifs in this passage are tied to the community\u2019s hope for an eschatological redemption\u2014indeed, the next passage will show that the eschatological process has been transferred to the hope for present-day salvation\u2014but all the same, the poem does not display any markedly eschatological traits.<br \/>\nThe second and decisive Qumran passage that combines Isaiah 42:1\u20133 with Habakkuk 1:4 appears in the Manual of Discipline, at the very beginning of the eschatological discussion, which includes a description of the total annihilation of all evil in the end of days. The verses in question parallel the passage from 1QMysteries, with which we opened the present discussion. Here is the relevant citation (1QS 4.18\u201320):<\/p>\n<p>God, in the mysteries of his knowledge and in the wisdom of his glory, has determined an end to existence of injustice and on the appointed time of the visitation he will obliterate it forever. Then the world truth shall emerge in victory, for it has been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for justice decided.<\/p>\n<p>Concerning the biblical background to this passage, it appears that the key lies in Isaiah 42:3: \u201che will bring forth justice in truth.\u201d This verse appears to have influenced the author\u2019s understanding of Habakkuk 1:4. According to the latter, \u201cjustice never emerges in victory\u201d in the present era, because of the dominion of iniquity that causes justice to \u201ccome forth perverted.\u201d The similarity between Isaiah and Habakkuk allows the interpreter to identify \u2018justice\u2019 with \u2018truth,\u2019 as the parallel in 1QHa 4.25 already demonstrated. As for why the poet speaks of \u2018world truth,\u2019 we will return to this question anon. The key issue is that the Qumran community was able to discover in this verse an important proclamation. The prophet teaches: \u201cThe Torah becomes slack and justice never emerges in victory. The wicked surround the righteous\u2014therefore justice emerges perverted\u201d (Hab. 1:4). To the Qumran reader, this means that the world will remain in dire straits until evil is banished from it. For as long as the wicked surround the righteous, justice never emerges in victory, or, in other words, the justice that does come forth under these conditions cannot but be perverted. In the future time, however, when wickedness is annihilated, \u201cworld truth shall emerge in victory.\u201d<br \/>\nOur discussion of the Manual of Discipline passage has thus far been superficial. A profound understanding of its meaning requires that we examine the broader context (1QS 4.18\u201323), of which our verses are an integral part. The passage includes the description of the baptism of the spirit in the end of days (1QS 4.20\u201322), a critically important component, since John the Baptist makes his followers the same promise. This promise is a link within the narrative chain of the broader passage, that seeks to delineate the various stages of the total ablution of mankind and the world, a process that will occur following the eschatological destruction of all evil, \u201cwhen those born of sin are locked up\u201d (1QMyst 1.5). When the appointed time comes, and God destroys all evil from the world, the truth will subsequently emerge from the ways of iniquity that defiled it under the dominion of sin. Then God will purify mankind as well: \u201cHe will sprinkle over him the spirit of truth like lustral water (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and (from) the defilement of the unclean spirit\u201d (1QS 4.21\u201322). The baptism of the purifying spirit serves to banish from mankind every trace of the tainted and defiled human nature that is now his lot. Man will be transformed from a base and despised creature, to an altogether new being, pure in both flesh and spirit. Then will the purified and redeemed man be able \u201cto instruct the upright ones with knowledge of the Most High, and to make understand the wisdom of the sons of heaven to those of perfect behavior. For those God has chosen for an everlasting covenant and to them shall belong the glory of Adam\u201d (1QS 4.22\u201323).<br \/>\nThus, the scroll\u2019s comments on the change in the status of \u201cworld truth\u201d (1QS 4.19\u201320) are not part of a single picture, unfolding before us the sublime purification and elevation of creation in the end of day, after the annihilation of all evil. Only now, when we have cast our net more widely, can we trace the true meaning of this concept, which involves the redemption of \u201cworld truth\u201d from its impurity. As noted above, from a purely interpretive standpoint, one would expect the author to refer to \u2018truth\u2019 simpliciter, not \u201cworld truth\u201d. After all, the importance of the concept \u2018truth\u2019 in Qumran\u2019s religious worldview is readily apparent. Indeed, one of the manuscripts of the Manual of Discipline (8.18) employs the word \u2018truth\u2019 in place of the Tetragrammaton. So it is clear that the author had some reason to prefer the version \u201cworld truth\u201d. After all, in the very same scroll we learn that \u201cthese are the foundations of the spirit of the sons of truth (in) the world\u201d (1QS 4.6), whereas other passages speak of \u201csons of truth.\u201d Now, the word \u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 can mean eternity in Qumran Hebrew, as we find, e.g., in 1QS 3.8. But the statement \u201cworld truth shall emerge \u05dc\u05e0\u05e6\u05d7\u201d draws on Habakkuk 1:4, where \u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 means \u2018victory,\u2019 and thus the sense appears to be \u201cworld truth shall emerge in victory.\u201d As for the phrase \u2018world truth,\u2019 it appears to refer to the truth that resides within the world, distinguishing absolute truth from this more partial, mundane truth.<br \/>\nThere remains one more interpretive issue to be addressed in the passage at hand. The Manual of Discipline states that \u201cthe \u2018world truth\u2019 has been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice\u201d (4.19), and one might understand that it was the world itself that was defiled under the government of Belial. But this is not the case. It was the \u2018world truth\u2019 that was defiled in this world, as Habakkuk 1:4 decisively proves. There Habakkuk states that \u201cjustice never emerges in victory,\u201d due to the present-day behavior of the wicked, and \u201ctherefore justice emerges perverted.\u201d As we\u2019ve seen above, the Qumran scrolls twice identify Habakkuk\u2019s prophecy with the truth. Thus, the idea of the \u2018world truth\u2019 being defiled in the paths of wickedness is anchored in Habakkuk\u2019s.<br \/>\nNow it is clear why the author of the scroll distinguishes between \u2018truth\u2019 in the broader sense and \u2018world truth,\u2019 which is the part\u2014or perhaps the emanation\u2014of truth that resides in the world. After all, absolute truth cannot, by its very nature, be sullied. Not only truth, but all the core concepts of the sect are immutable, and in this Qumran dualism is different from Gnosticism\u2019s. God \u201ccreated the spirits of light and of darkness and on them established every deed, on their paths every labor\u201d (1QS 3.25\u201326); God \u201csorted them into equal parts until the last time, and has put an everlasting loathing between their divisions. Deeds of injustice are an abhorrence to truth and all the paths of truth are an abhorrence to injustice. (There exists) a violent conflict in respect of all their decrees since they cannot walk together\u201d (1QS 4.16\u201318). And what could be higher than \u2018truth\u2019\u2014a term that takes the place of God\u2019s name!\u2014for the Qumran community? Truth as such, then, is pure, but the truth that resides in the world was indeed \u201cdefiled in the paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed\u201d (1QS 4.20\u201321).<br \/>\nThe difference between the absolute, immutable truth, and the \u2018world truth\u2019 which is currently in a state of defilement, may be explained from another perspective as well, namely, as part of the world historical redemption process, from its creation to the eschaton. God \u201ccreated man to rule the world and placed within him two spirits so that he would walk with them \u2026 the spirits of truth and of deceit\u201d (1QS 3.17\u201319). If so, creation is a divine act, not disparaged or evil. Concerning the concept of the defiled \u2018world truth,\u2019 it would have been better had the following statement been less opaque: \u201cFrom the spring of light stem the generations of truth, and from the source of darkness the generations of deceit\u201d (1QS 3.19). That is to say, all the developments and traits of truth emanate from the spring of light, while those of deceit derive from the source of darkness. It may be that \u2018spring of light\u2019 and \u2018source of darkness\u2019 have a concrete sense: perhaps the generations of truth and deceit flow into the world from locations transcendent to the world. A little later on the following is stated explicitly: \u201cThese are their paths [the paths of the spirits of truth and of deceit] in the world\u201d (1QS 4.2). It appears, then, that the \u2018world truth\u2019 is that part of the truth that has agency within the world, and thus is beholden to the developments that occur within the world that houses it. The Qumran community holds that the dominion of Belial is currently defiling the world, but this will cease on the appointed day of judgment, when all evil will be forever abolished. It should be noted that there has thus far not been found a single statement in the scrolls to the effect that this defilement has tainted the world itself; the world is conceived as the battleground upon which the forces of light and darkness engage in battle. According to 1QS 4.18\u201323, the wickedness that currently governs the world defiles both humanity and the \u2018world truth\u2019. But, again, at the appointed time, when the sources of deceit are sealed and evil can no longer enter the world, then evil will cease, as darkness flees in the face of light, as smoke dissipates and is no more. Then, both humanity and the \u2018world truth\u2019 will be purified of the residual defilement from the days of Belial. The eradication of evil from the two foci is described in similar terms:<\/p>\n<p>Then the world truth shall emerge in victory, for it has been defiled in paths of wickedness<br \/>\nThen God will refine \u2026 all man\u2019s deeds, and will purify for himself the structure of man \u2026 (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and (from) the defilement of the unclean spirit<\/p>\n<p>For the current inquiry, it would have helpful to know the precise sense of \u201cemerge in victory\u201d (\u05ea\u05e6\u05d0 \u05dc\u05e0\u05e6\u05d7)\u2014which originates, as noted above, in Habakkuk. The Hebrew word \u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 can mean \u2018eternity,\u2019 but this yields an almost impossible reading, that after the defeat of evil, the worldly truth will depart from the temporally delimited universe. This is a bit of theological dialectic that is foreign to the worldview of Qumran. \u05e0\u05e6\u05d7 means \u2018victory,\u2019 an exodus from slavery to freedom. This allows us to narrow the potential sense of \u201cthe world truth shall emerge in victory,\u201d but a number of questions remain. Chief among them is the following: did the author think that the \u2018world truth\u2019 is presently enslaved, but will gain its freedom in the eschaton, or, alternately, does the phrase \u201cemerge\u201d refer to a movement? If the latter, perhaps this image indicates that, once purified, the world truth will depart to be reunited with the absolute truth, or perhaps it will return to the spring of light, from which emerge the generations of truth. These questions remain open, since in the scrolls that have been published thus far there is no trace of the ideas and terminology found in this passage.<br \/>\nThe events that befall the \u2018world truth,\u2019 and particularly its defilement, are very similar to the Gnostic myth. And yet, it is imperative that we exercise restraint. To more clearly define the proximity between the Manual of Discipline\u2019s account of truth\u2019s defilement and eventual victory, on the one hand, and the Gnostic view, on the other, let us survey once again the drama as described in the scrolls. God \u201ccreated the spirits of light and of darkness and on them established every deed\u201d (1QS 3.25) and permitted the spirit of iniquity to act within the world all the days of the dominion of Belial. A part of the absolute truth is also located within the world, and is called \u2018world truth,\u2019 while the absolute truth resides, one must conclude, outside the world, in a \u201cspring of light\u201d (1QS 3.19). But due to the dominion of evil in the world, the world truth \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for judgment decided\u201d (1QS 4.19\u201320). Humankind suffers a similar fate, as even the sons of justice are tainted with sin. However, in the future God will \u201cpurify for Himself the structure of man \u2026 from every wicked deed. He will sprinkle over him the spirit of truth like lustral water (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and (from) the defilement of the unclean spirit\u201d (1QS 4.20\u201322). Humanity and the \u2018world truth\u2019 will, then, be purified at one and the same time. Before that time, that part of truth will be trapped within a world of sin and deceit, and thus \u201cemerges perverted,\u201d but when evil vanishes completely \u201cthe world truth shall emerge in victory\u201d (1QS 4.19\u201320).<br \/>\nHad 1QS 4.18\u201321\u2014with its account of the \u2018world truth,\u2019 its defilement in the world and its eventual triumph\u2014survived apart from the rest of the Qumran literature, there would undoubtedly be scholars who would identify it as a Gnostic fragment of unknown origin. They might have been perplexed that the spiritual entity that is defiled in the world is called \u2018truth\u2019 and not \u2018knowledge\u2019 or \u2018wisdom\u2019 and the like. They might also lament the absence of any information regarding the descent of \u2018truth\u2019 into the world, and particularly the call that frees her from her fetters and defilement. Our hypothetical scholars, unaware that this is a Qumran fragment, would likely notice that our text uses the same terminology of an eschatological baptism of the spirit as John the Baptist, which might lead some of them to far-reaching conclusions about the true religious doctrine of the Precursor. The passage does not contain the typically Gnostic negation of the flesh and of matter, but purification from evil\u2019s defilement through the agency of the spirit accords with the putative Gnosticism of the passage, as does the notion that the walkers in justice will gain knowledge of God and be elevated to the glory of Adam.<br \/>\nThis thought experiment may help clarify the common elements to our passage and the Gnostic worldview. Indeed, the notion of truth descending into the world, being defiled, but then emerging, purified, \u2018in victory,\u2019 is a central part of the mythology of the first known Gnostic, Simon Magus, a contemporary of the first Christians. Anyone familiar with Gnostic literature knows well the dramatic story, in its various versions, of the descent of \u2018knowledge\u2019 or \u2018wisdoms\u2019 from the supernal world, and their capture in this world, below. As a result of this descent, the evil material world came into existence. It is also well established that humanity is also trapped in these dire straits, and that the only path to redemption is through the endowment of \u201cspiritual\u201d people with \u201cknowledge of the Most High.\u201d As a result, not only are these individuals redeemed from the evil, material world, but parts of the supernal being that are trapped in matter will be released and return to their heavenly source.<br \/>\nAt the same time, it is important to bear in mind the substantive differences between them. The Gnostic myth contains a fiercely dramatic dynamic, that does not jibe with the Qumran writings. Both the members of the Qumran community and the Gnostics posit an absolute dichotomy between good and evil, but unlike the monotheistic\u2014indeed, theocentric\u2014Qumranites, the Gnostics\u2019 main innovation is the revolt of the angels, a turn against the one and only God of Israel\u2019s Torah. This reversal takes shape in the Gnostic mythology, which transforms a revolutionary theology into a drama that is both cosmic and very much human.<br \/>\nOthers have noted these differences, and we have repeated them here in order to draw the reader\u2019s attention to the fact that the passage in 1QS, and especially the discussion of the \u2018world truth,\u2019 may be seen as a Gnostic digression from the religious ideology of Qumran. As noted above, the scrolls present a fixed and immutable conceptual worldview; yet here we find that the \u2018world truth,\u2019 which is part of the absolute truth, has been altered, tainted, in this world, and will only be repaired in the end time. There is a clear similarity between this doctrine and the Gnostic notion of the \u201cwisdoms\u201d that, in essence, \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for justice decided.\u201d This similarity may be due to external, Gnostic influence on the Qumran thinkers, but I believe this view must be rejected. Better, to my mind, to suppose that the ideology of these sons of light developed the forces buried within it in posse in a Gnostic direction. In either case, it appears we were right to title this brief study \u201ca pre-Gnostic concept in the Dead Sea Scrolls.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>6.      \u201cIn the Image of the Likeness of His Form\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Written with Shmuel Safrai<\/p>\n<p>Scholars have long recognized the importance of the Book of Tobias for reconstructing the history of Jewish matrimony. Two Greek versions of the book are extent, the long and the short. Additional fragments of the book in Hebrew and Aramaic were uncovered among the Qumran scrolls, proving that the long Greek version is a translation from the Aramaic. According to Albright, this version was composed in the fifth or fourth century B.C.E., since the royal Aramaic of the Qumran fragments predates the Aramaic of the Book of Daniel. The book famously contains an interesting parallel to the phrase \u201caccording to the law of Moses and Israel\u201d (\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc) from the ketubah, the Jewish marriage contract. There are three relevant passages: Tobias 6:13, 7:12 and 7:13, and the differences between the three are fascinating. Tobias 6:13 indicates that Reu\u2019el cannot deny Tobias his daughter, \u201caccording to the Law of Moses\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u039c\u03c9\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2), or, following the long version, \u201cas per the statute of the Book of Moses\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5 \u039c\u03c9\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2). When the two are married, Reu\u2019el addresses Tobias, saying (7:12), \u201ctake her from now on according to the statute (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd),\u201d while the long version repeats the phrase found in 6:13: \u201cshe is given to you as per the law of the Book of Moses.\u201d In the third verse (7:13) Reu\u2019el says to Tobias: \u201cBehold, pray take her according to the Law of Moses (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u039c\u03c9\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2),\u201d and in the long version, \u201cPray take her according to the law and the statute written in the Book of Moses (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd \u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03b2\u03af\u03b2\u03bb\u1ff3 \u039c\u03c9\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2), that I give you her for a wife.\u201d This formula appears a fourth time, with a minor change, in the long version of the next verse (7:14): \u201caccording to the statute of the Law of Moses\u201d (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039c\u03c9\u03c5\u03c3\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd).<br \/>\nWe have cited the relevant formulas in both Greek versions, in order to allow the reader to come to her own conclusions. Needless to say, we cannot know to what extent the two Greek translators altered the original, but this much is clear: the Aramaic text discovered at Qumran includes a fragment containing the phrase \u201cbook of Moses,\u201d which the editors assign to Tobias 10:13, which fits with the fact that the long Greek version was translated from the Aramaic. We may assume, then, that all four verses of the Aramaic version read \u201cbook of Moses\u201d, but that \u201cbook\u201d was absent from the short version. Also absent is the important word \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, statute (which appears in Jewish ketubot, as we will see below), which only appears in Tobias 7:12: \u201ctake her from now on according to the statute (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u03ae\u03bd \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd)\u201d. In any case, the word \u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, which translates either \u05d3\u05ea or \u05d3\u05d9\u05df, alludes to the ketubah formula: \u201caccording to the law (\u05d3\u05ea or, in some cases, \u05d3\u05d9\u05df) of Moses,\u201d an allusion best preserved in the long Greek version, which is based on the Aramaic. It should also be noted that the Qumran Temple Scroll speaks of \u201ca young virgin who is not betrothed, and she is permitted to him by law (\u05de\u05df \u05d4\u05d7\u05d5\u05e7)\u201d (11QTa 66.8\u20139), a formula that is similar to that of Tobias 7:13.<br \/>\nLet us turn now to another passage from the Book of Tobias, namely Tobias\u2019s prayer on his wedding night, in which, inter alia, he says: \u201cYou made man and you made for him his wife, Eve, as a helpmate and a support, and from the two was born the seed of mankind. And you said: It is not good that man should be alone, I will make him a helper as his partner\u201d (8:6). This quote is from the long version, and the short is almost identical. Scholars have already noted that the mention of Adam and Eve and of their progeny is reminiscent of the Jewish matrimonial blessings, the topic of the present study.<br \/>\nThe two topics mentioned by Tobias\u2014marriage according to the Law of Moses, and Adam and Eve and progeny\u2014also appear in the standard version of the Samaritan marriage contract, which contains the formula: \u201c\u2026 like Eve, who was created from the rib of Adam as a helpmate, for fruitfulness and reproduction.\u2026 Just as the Lord said through his servant Moses: \u2018he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights\u2019 (Exod. 21:10).\u2026\u201d Is the conjunction of the two motifs here significant? It all depends on whether the formulas in the present-day Samaritan ketubah derive from earlier sources, and whether they may have been influenced by Jewish sources. It seems that as far as the two points in question are concerned, the latter possibility must be discounted, since the language of the Samaritan formula is quite different from the Jewish ketubah and the wedding blessings. However, even if the Samaritan marriage contract derives from an ancient source not influenced by the Jewish matrimonial traditions, it is still possible that the two motifs (Adam and Eve and their progeny, and Moses) do not derive from a single source common to the Samaritan ketubah, the Jewish blessings, and the Book of Tobias, but rather to the analogous role of matrimony in Jewish and Samaritan society. It is natural both for Jews and Samaritans to mention these motifs during a wedding ceremony. Indeed, Christians make mention of the first couple in the Garden of Eden during their wedding ceremonies, even to this very day. That said, we ought not underestimate the importance of the Samaritan ketubah for our study, as\u2014stylistic differences notwithstanding\u2014the appearance of the two motifs bespeaks a profound commonality, as will be evident in what follows.<br \/>\nThe formula \u201caccording to the law of Moses and Israel\u201d belongs in the Jewish ketubah. The formula, which has no halakhic significance, was added to the groom\u2019s pronouncement (\u201cBehold, you are sanctified unto me\u201d) only during the Middle Ages, and is attested beginning in the 11th century. As we saw, the long version of Tobias reflects the formula \u201caccording to the law of the Book of Moses.\u201d Fortunately, archaeological excavations have provided us with two ancient inscriptions that date roughly to the time of Bar Kokhba. In one, only the words \u201caccording to the law of M[oses]\u201d were preserved. It would appear that the formula used in this ketubah is identical to that of Babatha\u2019s famous marriage contract, which opens with the statement that the matrimony is proceeding \u201caccording to the law of Moses and of Israel\u201d (\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d0\u05d9). As the editor rightly notes, this is essentially the same formula as we find in the Talmudic discussion of the marriage contract of the Alexandrian community, which came before Hillel the Elder: \u201cWhen you enter my household you will be my wife according to the law (\u05d3\u05ea) of Moses and the Jews.\u201d It is possible that the two Yerushalmi passages once read \u05db\u05d3\u05d9\u05df (\u201caccording to the law\u201d) but that the scribe of MS Leiden, upon which the printed edition is based, or perhaps one of his predecessors, replaced it with \u05db\u05d3\u05ea (of similar meaning), with which he was more familiar.<br \/>\nDespite the early evidence for the formula \u201c\u05db\u05d3\u05d9\u05df \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d0\u05d9\u201d it appears that neither it, nor \u201c\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc,\u201d which is still in use today\u2014is original. We believe the earliest formula was \u201c\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea.\u201d The Mishnah states (Ketubot 7.6): \u201cThese are the women who are divorced without receiving the ketubah payment: a wife that transgresses the law of Moses and Jewish custom (\u05d4\u05e2\u05d5\u05d1\u05e8\u05ea \u05e2\u05dc \u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea).\u201d The Mishnah then elaborates the meaning of \u201claw of Moses\u201d and of \u201cJewish custom\u201d: transgressions against the former are full-fledged legal transgressions, while the latter refers to transgressions relating to proper behavior. This distinction, however, appears to be secondary\u2014a retroactive attempt to distinguish between the two elements, made when the formula had become problematic inasmuch as it refers both to written Halakhah encoded in the book of Moses, and to non-biblical and yet obligatory Halakhah. The word dat, in the sense of law, is Persian, while the word \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea is very unusual in later Hebrew, as Hebrew (unlike Aramaic) refers only to \u2018Israel\u2019 and not to \u2018the Jews.\u2019 As a result of this linguistic discomfort later authorities changed the formula to \u201c\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05d0\u05dc.\u201d The earliest attestation of this \u201ccorrected\u201d version is found in t. Ketubot 7.6: \u201cBecause he failed to treat her according to the law of Moses and Israel.\u201d This new formula, which is still standard today, is the typical lectio facilior, inasmuch as it does away with the archaic \u201coydwhy.\u201d The price for this move, however, is that, semantically, the word \u2018Israel\u2019 is now tied to its immediate predecessor, \u2018Moses,\u2019 but only loosely to \u05d3\u05ea. This is also true of \u05db\u05d3\u05d9\u05df \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d0\u05d9, where\u2014if we are correct\u2014the infrequent \u05d3\u05ea has been replaced by the more standard \u05d3\u05d9\u05df. If so, the syntax of \u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea is the most difficult of the three (thus, lectio difficilior), while its content is clearer than the others. Both its terminology (\u05d3\u05ea, \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea) and its content\u2014the law of Moses understood as the part of the law that is codified in the Torah, alongside an unwritten Jewish law\u2014indicated that it stems from the Persian or early Hellenistic period. And since the formula \u201c\u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05e1\u05e4\u05e8 \u05de\u05e9\u05d4\u201d is known from the Book of Tobias, it appears \u05db\u05d3\u05ea \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 \u05d5\u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d3\u05d9\u05ea is an expanded version that aims, perhaps, at greater clarity, or perhaps to distinguish the Jewish ketubah from its Samaritan counterpart.<br \/>\nNow to the main subject at hand. We saw above that both the Samaritan and the modern Jewish ketubot, as well as Tobias\u2019s prayer on his nuptial night, mention Adam and Eve and their progeny. They are also the subject of one of the \u201cseven blessings\u201d offered at Jewish wedding ceremonies. These blessings are listed in b. Ketubot 7b\u20138a in the name of Rav Yehudah, presumably the Amora by that name. But the opening of Kallah Rabbati, one of the so-called \u2018minor tractates,\u2019 reads: \u201cRegarding the seven blessings, how do we bless? Rabbi Levi said \u2026\u201d This seems to be the correct reading, and the Talmud\u2019s mistake, for in b. Ketubot 7b, immediately prior to the citation of the blessings in the name of Rav Yehudah, another matter\u2014the requirement that new guests appear with the bride and groom during the seven days of their wedding celebration\u2014is cited in his name. But this passage is also found in t. Megillah 4.14, where it is obvious that the sage in question is Rabbi Yehudah, the Tanna, and not Rav Yehudah, the Amora. This strongly suggests that Kallah Rabbati correctly cites the seven blessings in the name of Rabbi Levi, while the Babylonian Talmud erroneously attributed this statement to Rav Yehudah, due to the preceding mention of Rabbi Yehudah, the Tanna. And while the Talmud mentions only six blessings, adding the blessing on the wine yields seven blessings in all.<br \/>\nBut it is not only the seven blessings that are recited at wedding ceremonies. B. Ketubot 8a, immediately following the passage just cited, recounts an incident in which only five or six blessings were recited, followed by the assertion that \u201cthose of the east [i.e., Babylonia] bless the groom with seven blessings, those of the Land of Israel with three.\u201d In a discussion of the havdalah blessings, marking the end of the Sabbath, we find the following rule: \u201cOne who minimizes cannot proceed with less than three, one who maximizes cannot add beyond seven\u201d (b. Pesahim 103b). We may surmise the identity of the three wedding blessings. If we exclude the blessing on the wine, which apparently was not mandatory since it is not mentioned in Ketubot 8a, we come to the blessing \u201cthat all was made for His glory\u201d which is undoubtedly old since it is alluded to by Rabbi Yehuda in t. Megillah 4.14. The next blessing (\u201cBlessed art thou \u2026 who created man\u201d), however, is in fact the conclusion of the fourth blessing. It appears, then, that the third blessing was added for the sole purpose of reaching the number seven. The last blessing is beautiful and poetic, but its conclusion is identical with that of the sixth. It appears, then, that the last of the seven blessings is no more than a copy of its predecessor. It is not easy to decide whether the fifth (\u201c\u05e9\u05d5\u05e9 \u05ea\u05e9\u05d9\u05e9\u201d) or the sixth constituted part of the original three blessings. Perhaps both were once part of a single prayer that had to do with marital joy.<br \/>\nAll this points to the central importance of the fourth blessing, a text that\u2014as noted\u2014has rough parallels in the Samaritan ketubah and in the ancient Book of Tobias. In what follows, we will argue that the fourth blessing dates back to the time of the Second Temple, will try to elucidate its dependence on biblical motifs, and point to a fascinating parallel in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The benediction states: \u201cBlessed art thou O Lord our God, king of the Universe, who has created man in his image, in the image of the likeness of his form, and has prepared unto him out of himself a building forever. Blessed art thou, O Lord, Creator of man.\u201d<br \/>\nThe linguistic influence of the biblical creation story of Adam and Eve is plainly evident. The phrase \u201c\u05d0\u05e9\u05e8 \u05d9\u05e2\u05e8 \u05d0\u05ea \u05d4\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd\u201d depends on Genesis 2:7. The word \u05e6\u05dc\u05dd famously appears in Genesis 1:26\u201327, and note especially verse 26: \u201cLet us make humankind in our image,\u201d a verse that also contains the word \u2018likeness\u2019 (\u05d3\u05de\u05d5\u05ea). The blessing also mentions the creation of Eve: \u201cthe Lord made for Adam, from his rib, a building forever, as it is written, \u2018and the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman.\u2019&nbsp;\u201d The word \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea, \u2018form,\u2019 apparently serves as an allusion to Isaiah 44:13, regarding the creation of an idol: \u201che makes it in human form, with human beauty, to be set up in a shrine.\u201d Another possibility is that the author\u2019s reference to \u05e2\u05d3 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05df \u05e2\u05d3\u05d9, \u2018a building forever,\u2019 alludes to Psalm 132:12: \u201c\u2026 their sons forever shall sit on your throne.\u201d As we will see, this \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05df \u05e2\u05d3\u05d9 \u05e2\u05d3 refers in the blessing not only to Eve, whom God created for Adam from his rib, but also to the human race, the descendents of Eve who will exist \u201cforever.\u201d Humankind, then, is likened to a \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05df, a building. We might also mention a linguistic and conceptual parallel found in b. Shabbat 114a: \u201cTo what does \u05d1\u05e0\u05d0\u05d9\u05df refer? Rabbi Yohanan said: these are the sages who concern themselves with the building of the world all their lives.\u201d The same idea is famously found at the end of b. Berakhot (64 and 71): Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Hanina: Sages increase peace in the world, for Scripture states \u2018All your children shall be taught by the Lord, and great shall be the peace of your children (\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05da).\u2019 Don\u2019t read this as \u2018your children (\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05da)\u2019 but rather as \u2018your builders (\u05d1\u05d5\u05e0\u05d9\u05da).\u201d Both these dicta point, at the very least, to a possible connection between children and the building of the world, and it stands to reason that the author of the blessing was inspired by \u05d5\u05d9\u05d1\u05df in Genesis 2:22 to add the concept of \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05df \u05e2\u05d3\u05d9 \u05e2\u05d3, that is, the generations of Eve, the mother of all life. As for the ongoing existence of the progeny of Adam and Eve, the \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05df \u05e2\u05d3\u05d9 \u05e2\u05d3 of the blessing, it is worth citing the creation account in the Qumran Hodayot: \u201cYou have created the earth with your strength, seas and deeps [with dry land and all its inhabi]tants you have founded with your wisdom, everything which is in them you have determined according to your will\u201d (1QHa 9.13\u201316).<br \/>\nThere is also a significant parallel to the terminology and content of the wedding blessings in the beginning of the third book of the Sibylline Oracles, which is actually the end of the second book. There (line 8 or, in some version, 10) we find reference to man\u2019s having God\u2019s image, while further on (line 27 or 33) we read about God fixing \u201cthe pattern of the human form.\u201d It is possible that the Greek \u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03c2, pattern, reflects the Hebrew \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea, which appears in the same context in our benediction.<br \/>\nWe will return to the Dead Sea Scroll parallels to the benediction, one of which plays a critical role in our argument. But first it is necessary to clarify the meaning of \u201c\u05d1\u05e6\u05dc\u05dd \u05d3\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d5.\u201d The prayer book \u2019otzar ha-tefilot (252b) cites a saying by Rabbi David ben Zimra, which originally appeared in the anthology of Talmudic commentaries known as shitah mequbetzet to t. Ketubot 8a: \u201cOne must pay close attention to the fact that \u05e6\u05dc\u05dd is a subtle word, while \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea is a coarse term \u2026 and one should not use it to modify anything immaterial, including God. As a result there are those who emend the formula, but the matter is resolved by recognizing that \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d5, \u2018his form,\u2019 is reflexive. That is, \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05ea\u05d5 of man is in \u2018the image of the likeness\u2019 of the creator.\u201d In other words, the phrase \u05d1\u05e6\u05dc\u05dd \u05d3\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d5, \u2018in the image of the likeness of his form,\u2019 is an independent statement that stands in apposition to the preceding word, \u05e6\u05dc\u05de\u05d5. The form of man was created in the image of the likeness of God.<br \/>\nAs for the \u201cform of man\u201d (\u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d5 \u05e9\u05dc \u05d0\u05d3\u05dd), this terminology is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, specifically in two fragments from 1QMysteries (1Q27), which refer to the \u201cform of the male\u201d which will be no longer, since \u201ctheir form is of dust\u201d (\u05de\u05e2\u05e4\u05d3 \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05dd). This last phrase has a parallel in the Hodayot, where we find: \u201cWhat is someone born of woman.\u2026 He is a structure (\u05de\u05d1\u05e0\u05d4) of dust fashioned with water\u201d (1QHa 5.20\u201321), a verse that includes the word \u05de\u05d1\u05e0\u05d4 rather than the cognate form \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea. The author of the Hodayot further states: \u201cI am a creature of clay, fashioned with water, a foundation of shame and a source of impurity, an oven of iniquity and a building of sin\u201d (1QHa 9.21\u201322). He describes his body, saying, \u201cthe foundations of my build have crumbled\u201d (1QHa 15.4), and further \u201cYou founded upon rock my building and everlasting foundation as my base\u201d (1QHa 15.8\u20139). The term \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d4 in the sense of \u2018body\u2019 is also found in the Manual of Discipline, in reference to the purity of man in the end of days: \u201cThen God will refine, with his truth, all man\u2019s deeds, and will purify for himself the structure of man, ripping out all the spirit of injustice from the innermost part (\u05ea\u05db\u05de\u05d9 \u05d1\u05e9\u05e8\u05d5)\u201d (1QS 4.20\u201321). The juxtaposition of \u05de\u05d1\u05e0\u05d4 and \u05ea\u05db\u05de\u05d9\u05dd is also found in a Hodayot fragment, which reads \u201clike my build and my entrails\u201d (\u05db\u05de\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea\u05d9 \u05d5\u05ea\u05db\u05de[\u05d9]) (1QHa 22, middle). Clearly, then, the poetic use of \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea to refer to the human body has a number of fascinating attestations in the Qumran scrolls. This was the elevated, poetic language of the Second Temple period, as we are now able to recognize thanks to the discoveries at Qumran. Due to the unique worldview of the Qumran community, most of these references to the human body appear in a pejorative sense, but there is no reason to suppose this was true of all the literature of the day. After all, if the benediction speaks of the image of the likeness of the form of God, this form, \u05ea\u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05ea, undoubtedly carries a positive valence.<br \/>\nWe now turn to the most significant parallel to the fourth of the wedding blessings, and it is found in the War Scroll (10.14), as part of the description of the great acts of creation, one of which is \u201cman\u2019s image, the gener[ations of his r]ib.\u201d So great is the similarity between this phrase and the language of the wedding blessing, that Yadin\u2019s restoration is certainly correct. The parallel between the sectarian scroll and the \u201crabbinic\u201d blessing becomes more apparent when the two are juxtaposed:<\/p>\n<p>who has created man in his image, in the image of the likeness of his form, and has prepared unto him out of himself a building forever.<br \/>\nman\u2019s image and the gener[ations of his rib]<\/p>\n<p>The parallel goes beyond the linguistic and substantive similarities concerning man and his form, but rather extend to the statement about Eve, who is built from Adam\u2019s rib, and about her descendents: \u201cthe generations of his rib\u201d\u2014corresponding to the \u201cbuilding forever\u201d that God \u201cprepared unto him.\u201d There is, then, a literary connection between the language of the scroll and the wedding blessing. Are we to suppose that the author of the War Scroll was familiar with the wedding blessing, or perhaps both have their roots in the same literary tradition? Whatever the answer, the language of the War Scroll suggests that the blessing is ancient, and was composed during the Second Temple period. There is also a methodological lesson to be learned from these texts: scholars who argue that poetic language in liturgical texts is a marker of late composition are sadly mistaken. Our analysis suggests that at least parts of these poetic liturgical works are, to the contrary, quite early. Unfortunately, this is not the place to discuss the evolution of literary Hebrew in the Second Temple period and post 70.<br \/>\nFurthermore, it should not be surprising that the blessing states that the form of man, that is, man\u2019s material aspect, was created in the image of God. This is not, of course, an anthropomorphism, but rather a holistic view of man that encompasses his spiritual and material aspects alike. The anthropology that here finds expression is not one of dualism, according to which the spirit alone is created in God\u2019s image, but unitary, sanctifying both the body and the spirit. This same view finds expression, albeit in a more subtle form, in the teachings of Hillel the Elder, who taught that bathing in a bathhouse is a religious commandment:<\/p>\n<p>Once, when Hillel the Elder concluded his studies with his disciples, he walked along with them. His disciples asked him: \u2018Master, where are you bound?\u2019 He answered them: \u2018To perform a religious duty.\u2019 \u2018What,\u2019 they asked, \u2018is this religious duty?\u2019 He said to them: \u2018To wash in the bathhouse.\u2019 Said they: \u2018Is this a religious duty?\u2019 \u2018Yes,\u2019 he replied; \u2018if the statues of kings, which are erected in theatres and circuses, are scoured and washed by the man who is appointed to look after them, and who thereby obtains his salary\u2014nay more, he is exalted in the company of the great of the kingdom\u2014how much more I, who have been created in the image and likeness, as it is written: \u2018For in his own image God made mankind\u2019 (Gen. 9:6).<\/p>\n<p>We have traversed a long way to arrive at our destination. We began with the Book of Tobias, which contains the two motifs found in the Samaritan marriage contract, as well as in Jewish marriage ceremonies to this very day. The Book of Tobias employs the phrase \u201caccording to the law of the book of Moses,\u201d and we traced its development, ultimately arriving at the present version, \u201caccording to the law of Moses and Israel.\u201d The second motif in Tobias is found in the prayer he offers on his nuptial night (8:6), namely, the mention of the creation of Adam and Eve, from whom \u201cwas born the seed of mankind.\u201d This is the very content of one of the seven Jewish matrimonial blessings, and we have tried to explain its meaning. Apparently, this is the oldest of the seven blessings. Indeed, its terminology\u2014with its fascinating parallels in the Qumran scrolls\u2014suggests that it dates back to the Second Temple period. Our conclusions relate not only to the history and development of the matrimonial blessings, but to the meaning and function of ancient prayers as such: often they are the expression of profound religious and philosophical thought. The impetus for these prayers lies, of course, in a novel development of biblical thought, a topic which our jubilarian has so ably studied.<\/p>\n<p>7.      \u201cNot by an Angel \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<p>This titular phrase, familiar from the Passover Haggadah, was discussed in an earlier study of mine. The phrase \u201cNot by an angel \u2026 and not by a messenger, but rather the Holy One Blessed Be He himself in his glory (redeemed us from Egypt)\u201d does not appear in the sources from which the Haggadah as we now have it is drawn, but it is known from other rabbinic sources. It is worth noting that the Gospel of Mark echoes the same idea (Mark 13:32, and similarly Matt. 24:36), when Jesus says: \u201cBut about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angel in heaven, nor the son, but only the Father.\u201d The statement in Mark is, most likely, the earliest (even if indirect) witness to the statement under consideration.<br \/>\nThe assertion that God redeemed Israel not by the mediation of an angel or a messenger, but rather He Himself acted as redeemer, is based on the Hebrew Vorlage of Isaiah 63:8\u20139 LXX (among other witnesses), which is apparently the correct reading. It was Yehezkel Kaufmann who discovered that Isaiah 63:9 LXX provides the context for our statement from the Passover Haggadah. It is the Septuagint version that serves as the basis for, e.g., the NRSV: \u201cFor he said, \u2018Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely\u2019; and he became their savior in all their distress. It was no emissary (\u05e6\u05b4\u05e8) or angel but his presence that saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old.\u201d Already Yigael Yadin in his comments to the War Scroll 13.14 noted that the Qumran verse was in fact a midrashic elaboration of Isaiah 63:9 LXX. For there we find: \u201cAnd which angel or prince is an aid like [you?].\u201d This statement provides an important piece of textual evidence inasmuch as it demonstrates that the Qumran community interpreted Isaiah 63:9 according to the Septuagint\u2019s reading, against the Masoretic text as we have it today. This information could not be gleaned from the two Isaiah scrolls discovered at Qumran. In the fragmentary copy the relevant words are not preserved, while the Great Isaiah Scroll is inconclusive on this point. The only possibly significant detail in the Great Isaiah Scroll is the reading \u05dc\u05d5\u05d0 \u05e2\u05e8, which could be understood as a synthesis of the ketiv \u05dc\u05d0 (\u2018not\u2019) and the qere \u05dc\u05d5 (\u2018to him\u2019). This hypothesis is, however, best discounted since the plene orthography \u05dc\u05d5\u05d0 is typical in Qumran texts. Moreover, as I will show in what follows, the motivation for the qere form (\u05dc\u05d5) lies elsewhere.<br \/>\nIn the War Scroll 13.14 we find \u2018ruler\u2019 (\u05e9\u05e8) instead of \u2018emissary\u2019 (\u05e6\u05b4\u05e8), as in the Septuagint (and \u05e9\u05dc\u05d9\u05d7, \u2018messenger,\u2019 in the Haggadah). The shift is significant, as it is the former term that best accords with the original version of Deuteronomy 32:8\u20139:<\/p>\n<p>When the Most High apportioned the nations \/ when he divided<br \/>\nhumankind,<br \/>\nHe fixed the boundaries of the peoples \/ according to the number of<br \/>\nthe angels;<br \/>\nThe Lord\u2019s own portion was his people \/ Jacob his allotted share<\/p>\n<p>The idea that a divine ruler is appointed to each nation is quite ancient, and amply attested in the apocalyptic and eschatological literature of the Second Temple period. The Book of Daniel, for example, states that it is the angel Michael who governs Israel. But alongside this approach we find the claim (already encountered above in Deuteronomy) that while other nations are governed by angels, Israel is the Lord\u2019s portion. Indeed, it appears this is the view of Isaiah 63:8\u20139, according to the original reading reflected in the Septuagint, in the War Scroll, and in the Passover Haggadah. It is striking that, absent a proper appreciation of the importance of Isaiah 63:8\u20139 LXX\u2014a relatively recent development\u2014we would not be able to reconstruct the original sense of the verses from the ancient rabbinic sources. As we will see, this loss was caused by the qere \u05dc\u05d5 (\u2018to him\u2019).<br \/>\nWe must assume that the first step in the loss of the meaning of this verse lies in a shift in the understanding of \u05e6\u05e8. For, depending on the Hebrew vocalization, the same consonants may be read as \u05e6\u05b4\u05e8 (\u2018emissary\u2019) or as \u05e6\u05b8\u05e8 tzar (\u2018to anguish\u2019), and, over time, the latter became the dominant reading. This led to an intermediate stage, in which \u2018to anguish\u2019 was paired with the ketiv \u05dc\u05d0 (\u2018not\u2019), yielding \u201cHe did not anguish\u201d (rather than: \u201cIt was no emissary\u201d). This reading is reflected in the Vulgate and the Aramaic Targum, and was also the view of Rashi, the medieval Bible commentator, who, following the Targum, writes: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018In all their distress (\u05d1\u05db\u05dc \u05e6\u05e8\u05ea\u05dd)\u2019 that He brought upon them, \u2018He did not anguish (\u05dc\u05d0 \u05e6\u05e8),\u2019 that is, He did not bring anguish upon them in accordance with their misdeeds. For the angel of His Presence is Michael, the Ruler of the Divine Presence, who serves before God, and he always redeems as he is delegated to do by the Almighty.\u201d<br \/>\nIn the final (present) stage, the misreading of \u05e6\u05e8 was joined with the qere, \u05dc\u05d5 (\u2018for him\u2019) in place of \u05dc\u05d0 (\u2018not\u2019). This shift occurred in the Tannaitic period, as we see in a passage found both in the Sifre Numbers and in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishmael: \u201cAnd so you find that whenever Israel is enslaved the Divine Presence (Shekhinah), as it were, is enslaved with them, as it is said, \u2018\u2026 in all their distress He was distressed.\u201d<br \/>\nIn the earlier, intermediate, stage which followed the ketiv, the verse was interpreted as an assertion that God does not cause anguish to anyone, least of all to Israel, while the angel Michael saves them from distress. But now, following the qere, the meaning of the verse is transformed: the Holy One Blessed Be He participates, as it were, in the sufferings of Israel. We are dealing here with a particularly bold aspect of the Jewish humanism of that period, the notion that God suffers with Israel, which apparently originated in the circle of Rabbi Aqiva and his disciples. As Rabbi Meir says (m. Sanhedrin 6.5): \u201cR. Meir said: When man is troubled, what says the Divine Presence? My head pains me, my arm pains me. If these are the words of Scripture with regard to the blood of the wicked, how much more when the blood of the righteous is spilt?\u201d In truth, it is hard to determine the precise dynamic between the idea of God\u2019s suffering, on the one hand, and Isaiah 63, on the other. Did the qere \u05dc\u05d5 (\u2018to him\u2019) allow the verse to be \u201charnessed\u201d as a prooftext to the idea that God suffers with Israel, or perhaps to the contrary, the notion of divine commiseration with Israel gave rise to the qere \u05dc\u05d5. One thing is certain: the consonantal text of Isaiah 63:9 is a crux interpretum.<br \/>\nIt is worth noting that the anthropomorphic notion of God\u2019s suffering caused a great deal of discomfort among medieval Jewish Bible commentators, who were as a rule disturbed by the anthropomorphic elements in midrash. Rashi fails to note the qere, instead repeating in Hebrew the Targum\u2019s reading, while Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, referring to the qere, states: \u201cThis is to be understood as a parable, that is, as though God were in anguish and for this reason hastened to redeem them.\u201d<br \/>\nIn summary: The correct reading of Isaiah 63:9 was preserved in the Septuagint, and is also reflected in the War Scroll and in the Passover Haggadah. There is no question that this is a difficult verse, apparently because its terminology\u2014and its content\u2014are linked with the traditions involving the negotiations between God and Moses following the Golden Calf (Exodus 32:34; 33:14\u201315). The negotiations open with God commanding Moses: \u201cBut now go, lead the people to the place about which I have spoken to you; see, my angel shall go in front of you\u201d (Exod. 32:34). In other words, God sought to hand Israel over to an angel, until Moses interceded, saying, \u201cLet the Lord go with us\u201d (Exod. 34:9). A similar view is found in God\u2019s statement (Exod. 33:14): \u201cMy presence will go with you and I will give you rest.\u201d The translator of the Septuagint sensed the affinity between this verse and Isaiah 63:9, and translated the Hebrew \u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd (\u2018presence\u2019) in both verses with the same Greek word, \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, which here means \u201cI myself.\u201d Here, again, is Isaiah 63:8\u20139: \u201cFor he said, \u2018Surely they are my people, children who will not deal falsely\u2019; and he became their savior in all their distress. It was no emissary (\u05e6\u05b4\u05e8) or angel but his presence that saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old.\u201d<br \/>\nWe stated that the consonantal text of Isaiah 63:9 is difficult, particularly because the terminology borrows from Exodus. The first step in the loss of the original meaning occurred because the word \u05e6\u05e8 (\u05e6\u05b4\u05e8, \u2018emissary\u2019) was written scripto defectiva. The word \u05e6\u05e8\u05ea\u05dd, \u2018their distress,\u2019 which occurs in the previous verse, provided an erroneous solution, connecting \u05e6\u05e8 to \u05e6\u05e8\u05d4 (\u2018distress\u2019). Thus there emerged the view that God is not the source of Israel\u2019s distress. Who offers them succor? \u201cThe angel of God\u2019s presence\u2014Michael, one of the angels of the presence and heavenly ruler over Israel\u2014redeemed them.\u201d<br \/>\nThe next step in the obfuscation of Isaiah 63:9 is preserved in the Masoretic text (following the ketiv), as well as in the Vulgate and the Targum. It is followed by a third stage, in which the qere \u05dc\u05d5 (\u2018for him\u2019) replaces its homonym \u05dc\u05d0 (\u2018not\u2019). This reading is attested as early as the Tannaitic period, prior to the redaction of the Mishnah. The shift is graphically subtle, and it stands to reason that its originator was convinced he was restoring the original meaning of the verse. The qere \u05dc\u05d5, moreover, fits with the idea that God suffers along with Israel, which appears among the disciples of Rabbi Aqiva. Originally, then, God was not the direct cause of Israel\u2019s distress, whereas ultimately God actually participates in their anguish.<br \/>\nWe have traversed a long way to track the changes that occurred in the understanding of a single verse, Isaiah 63:9. But our perseverance has, I would hope, been rewarded, even in terms of methodology. We have uncovered an example of a perfect synthesis of textual history and biblical interpretation, on the one hand, and the spiritual history of ancient Israel, on the other.<\/p>\n<p>8.      A Qumran Fragment and the Second Blessing of the Amidah<\/p>\n<p>\u00c9mile Puech has recently published all the extant fragments of one of the Qumran scrolls. One of the fragments has great significance both for the gospels and for the history of the second blessing of the Amidah, known as \u2018Mighty Deeds\u2019 or gevurot. It is not easy to categorize the scroll and its content, since only a few small fragments survived. The fragment in question is the largest of the group, and it was copied in the early years of the first century B.C.E., which indicates it was composed prior to this time. The editor, Puech, is uncertain as to whether the text in question was composed by members of the Qumran community, since the extant fragments do not contain the ideas and terminology that characterize the Qumran sect. To the contrary: up to this point, the word \u05d7\u05e1\u05d9\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd (\u2018righteous men\u2019), for instance, has not turned up in any of the typically sectarian scrolls\u2014though it does here. The editor further notes that the fragment endorses the belief in the resurrection of the dead, and if this scroll does indeed reflect Qumran\u2019s own ideology, it follows that they too must be counted, along with the Pharisees and the church, as adherent to this belief. However, it appears this is not a sectarian composition. The mere fact that the scroll was copied by a Qumran scribe does not, in and of itself, prove that its content was acceptable to the community. After all, fragments of Ben Sira were also discovered among the scrolls, and he did not believe in life after death, while the Essenes believed in the immortality of the soul. It is not enough to state that the text in question states that God \u201cwill make the dead live\u201d (4Q521, frag. 2 II, line 12), to conclude that the author maintains a doctrine of a general, eschatological resurrection. But another fragment clarifies that this was indeed the belief of the author.<br \/>\nThe following passage is pertinent to our discussion (4Q521, frag. 2 II, lines 5\u201313):<\/p>\n<p>5.      For the Lord will consider the pious, and call the righteous by name,<br \/>\n6.      and his spirit will hover upon the poor, and he will renew the faithful with his strength.<br \/>\n7.      For he will honor the pious upon the throne of an eternal kingdom,<br \/>\n8.      freeing prisoners, giving sight to the blind, straightening out the twisted.<br \/>\n\u2026<br \/>\n11.      And the Lord will perform marvelous acts such as have not existed, just as he said,<br \/>\n12.      for he will heal the sick and will make the dead live, he will proclaim good news to the poor<br \/>\n13.      and he will satisfy the impoverished; he will lead the abandoned and enrich the hungry.<\/p>\n<p>The author enumerates the \u2018marvelous acts such as have not existed\u2019 which the Lord will perform \u2018just as he said\u2019 (line 11). There is no doubt that this is the Jewish context out of which grew the gospel of the \u201chistorical\u201d Jesus.<br \/>\nAs noted, there is an important parallel between line 12 of this passage, and the response Jesus gives to the messengers from John the Baptist. Indeed, lines 12\u201313 are very similar, both in form and in content, to the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:3\u201312; Lk. 6:20\u201323). Furthermore, the scroll states (line 6) that \u201chis spirit will hover upon the poor.\u201d This statement explains the phrase \u201cthe poor of spirit,\u201d which is attested both from the Beatitudes (Matt. 5:3) and from the scrolls, where it refers to the Qumran members themselves. These are not the poor as such, but rather the poor upon which the spirit of God hovers.<br \/>\nThe Qumran fragment in question is particularly meaningful for the second blessing of the Amidah, known as \u2018Mighty Deeds\u2019 (gevurot). For here we see that the purpose of the blessing was not to emphasize the belief in resurrection, as against those who would deny it, but rather to praise God as the doer of \u201cmighty deeds.\u201d Indeed, this may once have been the conclusion of the blessing. Thus, the phrase \u201cYou revive the dead\u201d that opens the benediction does not refer to a general resurrection in the future. But first let us cite the relevant lines from our text:<\/p>\n<p>8.      freeing prisoners, giving sight to the blind, straightening out the twisted \u2026<br \/>\n12.      for he will heal the sick and will make the dead live, he will proclaim good news to the poor<\/p>\n<p>A few preliminary remarks are in order. First, line 8 is a citation of Psalm 146:7\u20138. Second, it is noteworthy that the Qumran passage is reminiscent of the standard, \u201cBabylonian,\u201d version of the blessing, not of the Palestinian version, which states: \u201cYou are mighty, powerfully humbling the mighty and bringing the tyrant to justice, You live forever, causing the wind to blow and the dew to settle. You sustain all life and revive the dead, bringing forth salvation for us in a moment\u2019s time. Blessed art thou O Lord, who revives the dead.\u201d There are Palestinian traditions of the blessing, but all contain similar language. Interestingly, the Qumran passage is most like the Babylonian version. This is not particularly problematic, since the Palestinian version was the norm in Byzantine Palestine, while its \u201cBabylonian\u201d cousin is in no way later; at least the core elements of most \u201cBabylonian\u201d blessings are, no doubt, of Palestinian origin.<br \/>\nLet us, then, compare the language of the gevurot blessing (in its standard, \u201cBabylonian\u201d version) with the Qumran scroll:<\/p>\n<p>Gevurot<br \/>\n4Q521<br \/>\nrevives the dead with great mercy<br \/>\nmakes the dead live<br \/>\nsupports all who fall<br \/>\nstraightens out the crooked<br \/>\nheals the sick<br \/>\nheals the sick<br \/>\nfrees prisoners<br \/>\nfrees prisoners<\/p>\n<p>If we compare the language of the blessing to our Qumran text, on the one hand, and the biblical parallels, on the other, we find that the two post-biblical texts are much closer to each other than to the language of the original biblical verses.<br \/>\nThe linguistic similarity is such that it excludes the possibility of mere coincidence. To my mind, it is unlikely that the second blessing of our Amidah was known to the author of 4Q521. And in any case, there is no evidence that the Qumran composition influenced the rabbinic blessing, since there are no sectarian elements visible in the Qumran composition. The blessing too is fundamentally non-sectarian\u2014except for the secondary element in its conclusion, i.e. the reference to the Pharisaic-Rabbinic belief in eschatological resurrection.<br \/>\nIn light of all this, it appears that already in the Hasmonean era there existed a prayer, whose language is reflected in the second blessing of the Amidah (the Gevurot) in its standard version, and this is a significant finding for the history of Jewish prayer in general. Moreover, the fragment from Qumran sheds light on the Jewish background of Jesus, though that lies beyond the purview of the present analysis.<\/p>\n<p>9.      4QMMT and the Benediction Against the Minim<\/p>\n<p>Dedicated to Clemens Thoma, in friendship<\/p>\n<p>I. The Irredeemably Wicked in Seder \u02bfOlam<\/p>\n<p>A fascinating article published recently, deals with a Qumran scroll that has yet to be published in its entirety. One of the passages in this text, known as 4QMMT, supports our hypothesis that Birkat ha-Minim, the blessing against heretics, in the Amidah prayer, was originally aimed against the Essenes. As such, it seems apt to summarize the results of our findings of the past several years, and provide additional analysis that may help clarify this knotty problem. To expand the scope of the discussion, we first turn to Tosefta Sanhedrin 13.4\u20135, the source for b. Rosh ha-Shanah 17a. However, a superior version of the passage is found at the end of the third chapter of Seder \u02bfOlam, from which we now quote:<\/p>\n<p>The judgment of the evildoers in hell is twelve months as it is said \u201cFrom new moon to new moon\u201d (Isa. 66:23). Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: from Passover to Pentecost, as it is said, \u201cfrom holiday to holiday\u201d (ibid.). After twelve months, the souls of Jewish sinners who transgressed the commandments disintegrate and their bodies decompose; they become ashes, hell expels them, and the wind disperses them under the feet of the righteous, as it is written: \u201cAnd you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the Lord of hosts\u201d (Mal. 4:3 [MT 3:21]). But those who separate themselves from the community, for example the minim, informers, hypocrites and heretics, as well as those who cause terror in the Land of the Living, those who deny the resurrection to the dead, those who say that the Torah is not of divine origin and Jews who scoff at the words of the sages, will be locked in hell and they will be judged in it for all eternity, forevermore, as it is written \u201cAnd they shall go out and look at the dead bodies of the people who have rebelled against me; for their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched, and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh\u201d (Isa. 66:24). \u201cAnd their form shall waste away; Sheol shall be their home (zevul)\u201d (Ps. 49:14 [MT 49:15]). That is, Sheol wastes them away, but they are not wasted away. On account of what? That they lifted their hands against the zevul, as it is written: \u201ctheir home (zevul),\u201d and zevul refers to the Temple, as it is written, \u201cI have built You an exalted house (zevul)\u201d (1 Kgs. 8:13).<\/p>\n<p>The opening sentence is not found in the Tosefta parallel, but is found in m. Eduyot 2.10, where the view that \u201cThe judgment of evildoers in hell is 12 months\u201d is cited in the name of Rabbi Aqiva. According to his view, which is shared by the other sages, the infernal punishment of the evildoers is temporary, since following that period \u201call flesh shall come to worship before me, says the Lord\u201d (Isa. 66:23). The discussion that follows in Seder \u02bfOlam, however, suggests that Jews who transgress the Torah and the commandments are punished in hell for twelve months and then destroyed (the same view is found in t. Sanhedrin 13.4\u20135). Not only does this contradict Rabbi Aqiva\u2019s position\u2014that is, that evildoers are relegated to hell for a limited time only\u2014but there is an inherent difficulty with the notion that evildoers are to be destroyed, but that destruction is preceded by a stay in hell. It is more probable that this \u201ctransition\u201d time in hell (prior to total destruction) emerged as a secondary development of Rabbi Aqiva\u2019s position in m. Eduyot 2.10. Indeed, in the text of Seder \u02bfOlam the phrase \u201cAfter twelve months\u201d follows immediately after the citation from Eduyot 2.10, but before the punishment of Jewish transgressors. But while this is a plausible hypothesis, it should be noted that the Pesiqta de Rav Kahana suggests that the souls of evildoers dissipate after twelve months, with hell playing no purifying role in the account.<br \/>\nIn any case, the account that parallels t. Sanhedrin deals with two types of sinners and two infernal punishments meted out to them. Clearly, the editor sought to emphasize the severity of the second group, as its punishment is far worse than that of the first: it is, after all, far better to be destroyed than to be in hell \u201cfor all eternity, forevermore.\u201d The same is true regarding the mendacity of the two groups of sinners\u2014the second group is far more severe, and far more clearly defined, than the first. The first are merely \u201cJews who transgressed the commandments,\u201d and there is no discussion of the nature of these transgressed commandments. Indeed, in the Tosefta they are referred to simply as \u2018sinners\u2019 (\u05e4\u05d5\u05e9\u05e2\u05d9\u05dd). The second group, however, is made up of those who \u201cseparated themselves from the community,\u201d and this is clearly a very severe transgression. Despite this, the second list contains a variety of loosely related sins, and we will try to understand how this list came to be and to identify its original intent. All the same, it does appear that there were once two distinct theories regarding infernal punishment, and that one of them did not need to stress that severity and precise nature of the sins.<br \/>\nThe punishment of the first group is that their souls \u201cdisappear, and their bodies decompose; they become ashes, hell expels them, and the wind disperses them.\u201d Absolute annihilation is also mentioned in the New Testament, namely in Second Thessalonians (1:8\u20139), where Paul discusses\u2014in Greek, of course\u2014the great day of judgment, when \u201c\u2026 those who do not know God and \u2026 those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus \u2026 will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, separated from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.\u201d The same phrase appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well. Thus, the War Scroll speaks of the end of days, a time \u201cof everlasting destruction for all the lot of Belial\u201d (1QM 1.5). The Manual of Discipline also says, sublimely, of the sinner, that \u201chis spirit will be obliterated, the dry with the moist, without mercy. May God\u2019s anger and the wrath of His verdicts consume him for everlasting destruction\u201d (1QS 2.14\u201315). The most important parallel for the present discussion is in column 5 of 1QS. There the author speaks of the need \u201cto be segregated from all the men of injustice who walk along the path of wickedness\u201d (5.10\u201311), since \u201cthey treated revealed matters with disrespect, and this is why wrath will rise up for judgment in order to effect revenge by the curses of the covenant, in order to administer fierce punishments for everlasting annihilation without there being any remnant\u201d (5.12\u201313).<br \/>\nThis last passage from the Manual of Discipline alludes to Numbers 15:30\u201331: \u201cBut whoever acts high-handedly \u2026 affronts the Lord, and shall be cut off from among the people. Because of having despised the word of the Lord and broken His commandment, such a person shall be utterly cut off and bear the guilt.\u201d The verse refers to people who have offended the Torah \u201chigh-handedly\u201d and violated its commandments (as understood by the Qumran community) and therefore \u201csuch a person shall be utterly cut off and bear the guilt.\u201d Or, as the Manual of Discipline declares, God will \u201cadminister fierce punishments for everlasting annihilation without there being any remnant.\u201d It is fascinating to compare and contrast the Qumran interpretation to Numbers 15:30\u201331 with that of the rabbinic midrash, the Sifre Numbers. \u201cWhoever acts high-handedly\u2014this is one who reveals aspects of the Torah.\u201d Rabbi Aqiva goes on to interpret the second hemistich of the verse, by playing on the repeated employment of the same root both in the absolute and finite forms (hikaret tikaret), an emphatic structure in biblical Hebrew (thus: \u201cshall surely be cut off\u201d): \u201chikaret\u2014this refers to this world; tikaret\u2014this refers to the world to come.\u201d We find, then, a striking resemblance between Rabbi Aqiva\u2019s interpretation and the position of the Manual of Discipline, on the one hand, and the punishment of \u201cJewish sinners who transgress the commandments\u201d in Seder \u02bfOlam\u2014their souls disintegrate and their bodies decompose\u2014on the other, since these too will not be pardoned after their death. Even Rabbi Aqiva, whose views are generally moderate, is quite strict when it comes to one who reveals aspects of the Torah, \u201cThe dead are atoned for by their death, but these remain accountable (for this transgression).\u201d But if such a sinner were to repent prior to his death, his transgression would, of course, be pardoned. Here too, then, despite all the severity of the issue at hand, we can recognize the human aspect of Rabbi Aqiva\u2019s teaching. The question is, whether even prior to Rabbi Aqiva there were sages who were willing to employ such a benevolent dialectic argument in order to free certain sinners from their hellish fate. As we will see, Jesus\u2019 statement in Matthew 12:32 does not reflect the same lenience that is typical of Rabbi Aqiva and his associates.<br \/>\nWe turn now to the punishment of the second group of sinners: they \u201cwill be locked in hell and they will be judged in it for all eternity, forevermore.\u201d Here more than the other cases we should assume that those who are condemned to this eternal punishment have no hope of atonement under any circumstances; their sin is so severe that they have lost all hope. This interpretation finds support in Jesus\u2019 response to those who accused him of exorcising with the help of Beelzebul, the master of the demons. He says: \u201cWhoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come\u201d (Matt. 12:32). The same tradition is already attested in 1 Enoch, where one of the angels of Holiness is charged with the spirits of those dead who \u201csin against the spirit\u201d (20.6). The essence of their crime is explained a little later on: \u201cThis accursed valley (that is, hell) is for those accursed forever; here will gather together all those accursed ones, those who speak with their mouth unbecoming words against the Lord and utter hard words concerning his glory. Here shall they be gathered together, and here shall be their judgment, in the last days\u201d (27.2\u20133). According to 1 Enoch, then, those who speak against the Lord and his glory have not atonement in this world or in the next, but rather they are doomed to hell for all eternity, forevermore.<br \/>\nComparative analysis of the second type of sinners in Seder \u02bfOlam and t. Sanhedrin 13.5, on the one hand, and the parallel traditions in the Book of Enoch and the New Testament, may point us toward the original kernel concerning those damned to hell for all eternity. We saw that according to Enoch and Jesus\u2019 saying, those who spoke ill of the Lord and cursed his Glory, will not be forgiven in this world nor the next. And indeed, we find this very accusation in our Tosefta tradition: the punishment for sinners who \u201clifted their hands against the zevul is an eternity in Hell.\u201d The best interpretation of this statement is found in the Palestinian Talmud Sanhedrin 23c: \u201cJust as one who blasphemes is hanged because he lifted his hands against a core belief (\u05e9\u05e4\u05e9\u05d8 \u05d9\u05d3\u05d5 \u05d1\u05e2\u05e7\u05e8), so I extrapolate regarding all those who lift their hands against a core belief that they too are to be hanged.\u201d In this context, the Hebrew \u05d6\u05d1\u05d5\u05dc refers to God\u2019s glory, which the sinners have affronted. The gloss found in Seder \u02bfOlam and in t. Sanhedrin 13.5 (at the end), according to which zevul refers to the Temple, is, then, a secondary addition.<br \/>\nWe have seen that those who \u201clifted their hands against the zevul\u201d and rebelled against divine kingship and the divine glory, will not be forgiven and are condemned to hell for all eternity, at least according to Jesus and the Book of Enoch. Clearly, then, this was the original meaning of Seder \u02bfOlam and Tosefta Sanhedrin. And yet, while this view is still articulated in these texts, there appears to be a shift in the overall sense. Now, those who have abandoned all hope are a distinct type within the broader category of those who separated themselves from the community as a whole inasmuch as they \u201clifted their hands against the zevul\u201d and spoke blasphemously against God\u2019s glory. True, those who are condemned to eternal damnation are still people whose mouth has spoken \u201cunbecoming words against the Lord\u201d and uttered \u201chard words concerning his glory\u201d (Enoch 27.2\u20133), but the general thrust is somewhat different: these are sinners who have rebelled against God by virtue of their ideological and practical veering from the ways and beliefs of the people as a whole, thus causing damage to the Torah, the faith, and the People of Israel. Incidentally, the version in Seder \u02bfOlam is superior to that of t. Sanhedrin 13.5 inter alia in that it does not count the \u05e4\u05d5\u05e8\u05e9\u05d9\u05df, \u2018the separatists,\u2019 among a long list of sinners, but rightly locates them at the opening of the list, with the other sinners functioning as an enumeration of this general type: \u201cThose who separate themselves from the Jewish community, e.g., the minim and the apostates.\u201d<br \/>\nI believe a still more specific definition of these separatists is possible. The list of those who have broken away from the community as a whole and who are thus condemned to hell for all eternity, may be divided into two subcategories. The first includes \u201cthe minim and the apostates and the informants and the hypocrites,\u201d while the second enumerates \u201cthe heretics (epikorsin) who deny the resurrection of the dead and state that the Torah is not of divine origin.\u201d The latter refers only to core theological errors and is limited to the realm of right belief, and originates in Mishnah Sanhedrin 10.1\u2014or in a tradition that is preserved in this Mishnah. Superficially, it might be tempting to correlate the Mishnah\u2019s list of those who have no place in the world to come with those doomed to eternal damnation in hell, especially as it would not be particularly difficult to include individuals who maintain deviant ideological beliefs among \u201cthose who separate themselves from the community.\u201d Nonetheless, it stands to reason that those who cut their ties with the People of Israel as a whole are enumerated in the first list. Thus it would appear that the three additional types were added at a later date to the first list, thus expanding the purview of the original statement.<br \/>\nAt first glance it appears that the author of our Seder \u02bfOlam was familiar with two established lists of typological sinners, and, wishing to delineate the types of \u201cseparatists,\u201d he used these two existing lists of those who have excluded themselves from the People of Israel as a whole. Nonetheless, I am of the opinion that this is true only of the second list of sinners, which really does originate in m. Sanhedrin 10.1. The first list, which includes \u201cthe minim and the apostates and the informants and the hypocrites\u201d is of another source. True, this list is reflected in a variety of other sources, but it would appear that this is its original site of composition. From here it spread, either directly or indirectly, to the other sources mentioned. After all, the four types enumerated as having broken from Israel as a whole certainly fit the determination that they divorced themselves from the general public. Let us examine, for the sake of clarification, another passage that includes the list of four sinners: \u201cThe minim and the apostates, and the informants, and the hypocrites, and those who desecrate the name of God. Of them does Scripture state: \u2018The wicked shall depart to Sheol, all the nations that forget God\u2019 (Ps 9:17), and \u2018What is crooked cannot be made straight\u2019 (Ecc 1:15).\u201d Here we find a number of blasphemers in addition to our four established types: all these deviants are beyond redemption, and so those who \u201cforget God\u201d are seated in hell for all eternity. The language of this passage indicates that it is based on the same tradition preserved in Seder \u02bfOlam\u2019s discussion of those who separate themselves from the Jewish people\u2014to this list have been added three types of sinners, originally cited in m. Sanhedrin 10.1.<br \/>\nAs noted, the four typological sinners are all \u201cseparatists.\u201d The first of these are the minim. Much has been written on this term, and there is no need to add to the discussion here, except to state the established fact that this term did not originally designate the Christians, and that it was only later that they were counted among the minim. Next come the apostates (\u05de\u05e9\u05d5\u05de\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd), a term that in the Hebrew of the Sages designates apostasy in the broader sense of one who has turned his back on his faith\u2014without necessarily converting to another religion. The third type is made up of the informants (\u05de\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea), that is, those who hand Jews over to the non-Jewish authorities. The various versions of Birkat ha-Minim, which will be discussed below, employ the term \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd, but it should be noted that while mishnaic Hebrew knows the verb \u05dc\u05d4\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05df (to act as an informant), the noun \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05df is not attested\u2014strong support for reading \u05de\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea over \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd. The severity of this accusation is heightened by the repeated occurrences of the verb \u05dc\u05de\u05e1\u05d5\u05e8 (in Greek) in the Gospel accounts of Jesus\u2019 betrayal to the Roman authorities. Just prior to his being handed over to the authorities, Jesus himself alludes to the punishment that awaits the betraying informants: \u201cThe Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that one not to have been born\u201d (Matt. 26:24; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22). This statement fits the account of Seder \u02bfOlam and Birkat ha-Minim.<br \/>\nThe final group of sinners are the \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd, the hypocrites. There is no question that the hypocrites belong to this list, even though they are omitted in some versions\u2014including the Seder \u02bfOlam passage as it appears in t. Sanhedrin 10.5 (and, following the Tosefta, in b. Rosh ha-Shanah 17a). The hypocrites are also not attested in any of the extant versions of Birkat ha-Minim. The reason for their omission is evident: the root \u05e0-\u05e3-\u05d7- underwent a semantic shift and in later Hebrew came to mean \u2018flatterer.\u2019 As a result, the idea that the \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd, the \u201cflatterers,\u201d have separated themselves from the Jewish community no longer made sense to those who knew the term only in its later semantic development. How could flatterers be thought to have broken away from the public? But this was not always so. Already in the Ugaritic epic we find the phrase \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3 \u05dc\u05d1\u05da, meaning \u201cthe wickedness of your heart.\u201d In biblical Hebrew as well, the root \u05d7-\u05e0-\u05e3 refers to various wicked men and sinners, and the noun \u05d7\u05e0\u05d5\u05e4\u05d4 can also refer to impurity. The Septuagint also translates the root in this sense, that is, as wickedness and the like. Furthermore, in the Wisdom of Ben Sira (16:6; 40:15; 41:10) the word appears in a pejorative sense. In 16:6 we find a parallelism between \u201ca sinful band,\u201d on the one hand, and \u201ca godless people\u201d (\u05d2\u05d5\u05d9 \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3), on the other. Similarly, in 40:15 Ben Sira juxtaposes \u201cthe offshoot of violence\u201d with \u201cthe root of the godless\u201d (\u05e9\u05d5\u05e8\u05e9 \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3). Ben Sira\u2019s grandson, who translated the book into Greek, maintained the original sense of the Hebrew root. The word appears but once in the Book of Daniel (11:32), in the section composed during the decrees of Antiochus IV: \u201cHe shall seduce with intrigue (\u05d9\u05d7\u05e0\u05d9\u05e3) those who violate the covenant.\u201d There is some dispute among modern commentators whether the word is used in its original sense, or perhaps in the newer meaning of flattery. Apparently, the semantic shift in the root \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3 occurred at a relatively late time, and only in Hebrew, since Syriac maintains the biblical sense of \u2018wicked.\u2019<br \/>\nAs noted, from the time of the Tannaim and down to modern Hebrew, the root \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3 designates a flatterer, one who praises another in order to find favor in their eyes. Nonetheless, the biblical sense of \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd did not disappear completely from the Hebrew of the sages even as late as the third century C.E. The following tradition is cited in the name of Rabbi Yonathan, or perhaps Rabbi Yohanan: \u201cEvery occurrence of the word \u05d7\u05e0\u05d5\u05e4\u05d4 in Scripture, refers to the minim. The key verse for this interpretation is \u201ctrembling has seized the godless (\u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd)\u201d (Isa. 33:14). Here the sage argues that the biblical sense of \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd is identical with minim. Thus, the \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd are rightly counted in the list of those who have \u05e4\u05e8\u05e9\u05d5 \u05de\u05d3\u05e8\u05db\u05d9 \u05e2\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8, alongside the minim. Clearly, the \u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd were characterized by a particular kind of wickedness, unlike that of the other sinners enumerated, but at the present there is no way to decide this critical issue.<\/p>\n<p>II. \u2018Traitors\u2019 in the Qumran Scrolls<\/p>\n<p>We have tried to show that the end of Seder \u02bfOlam, Chapter Three, is based on the view that those who \u201cseparate themselves from the path of the community, for example the minim, the informers, the hypocrites and the heretics \u2026 lifted their hands against the zevul\u201d and rebelled against the kingship of God. In order to clarify the background to this view we must turn to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which indicate that one aspect of this view is prevalent not only in \u2018rabbinic\u2019 Judaism, but was once, during the Hasmonean reign, shared by all Jews.<br \/>\nA previously unknown passage from the Damascus Document reads:<\/p>\n<p>12.      \u2026 [And whoever]<br \/>\n13.      divulges the secret of his people to the pagans, or curses his people or preaches<br \/>\n14.      rebellion against those anointed with the spirit of holiness and [leads his people to] error [or rebels against]<br \/>\n15.      God\u2019s word.<br \/>\n(4Q270 [= 4QDe], fragment 2.12\u201315)<\/p>\n<p>The text survives in fragmentary form, so it is impossible to determine the precise nature of the sins enumerated here. Nonetheless, it is clear that the passage deals with an individual who \u201cdivulges the secret of his people to the pagans,\u201d who curses his people and who \u201crebels against God\u2019s word.\u201d There appears to be a strong correlation between this passage and the account in Seder \u02bfOlam regarding those who \u201clifted their hands against the zevul.\u201d One point of difference: in Seder \u02bfOlam the informants and the other sinners belong to a single category of those who rebel against the kingship of God, while in the Qumran fragment those who rebel against God\u2019s word are another type of sinner, alongside those who betray their own people. As we will see presently, this is the situation in the Temple Scroll as well, one passage of which may clarify some of the obscure points in the Damascus Document fragment:<\/p>\n<p>If a man passes on information against his people or betrays his people to a foreign nation, or does evil against his people, you shall hang him on a tree and he will die. On the evidence of two witnesses or on the evidence of three witnesses he shall be put to death and they shall hang him on the tree. If it happens that the man has committed a capital offence and he escapes amongst the nations and curses his people, the children of Israel, he also you shall hang on the tree and he will die. And their corpse shall not spend the night on the tree; instead you shall bury them that day because those hanged on a tree are cursed by God and man; thus you shall not defile the land which I give you for inheritance. (11QTemple 64.6\u201313)<\/p>\n<p>This passage deals with two types of sinners who have forged bonds with the gentiles and thus, in effect, \u201cseparated from the community,\u201d both of which are condemned to hanging on a tree. The first involves one who \u201cbetrays his people to a foreign nation,\u201d that is, an informant. The second is more difficult to define, but we need not concern ourselves with its precise details; it is the man who \u201cescapes amongst the nations and curses his people, the children of Israel\u201d both as the crowning act of treason and as an attempt to find favor in the eyes of the enemy. Whatever the details, there is a clear similarity between the two types of sinners condemned to death by hanging in the Temple Scroll, and the statement from the Damascus Document cited above. In the latter, it is \u201cwhoever divulges the secret of his people to the pagans, or curses his people,\u201d as well as one who \u201crebels against God\u2019s word.\u201d There can be no question that the curses of the Damascus Document are the equivalent of the blasphemer, as described in Mishnah Sanhedrin 6.4: \u201cAll that have been stoned must be hanged. So Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: None is hanged save the blasphemer and the idolator.\u201d In other words, the same punishment is meted out to the one who curses in the Qumran scroll as to the blasphemer in the Mishnah. Taken together, these texts indicate that even though the Temple Scroll 64.10 speaks only of one who curses his people, this is merely one aspect of the accusation of cursing God Himself.<br \/>\nThese later discussions of the laws of hanging are based on Scripture: \u201cWhen someone is convicted of a crime punishable by death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, his corpse must not remain all night upon the tree; you shall bury him that same day, for anyone hung on a tree is under God\u2019s curse. You must not defile the land that the Lord your God is giving you for possession\u201d (Deut. 21:22\u201323). We have already cited part of Mishnah Sanhedrin 6.4 concerning the hanging of the blasphemer and the idolater, which goes on to state, \u201cWhy is this one hanged? Because he blessed [= cursed] the Name, and the name of heaven was profaned.\u201d This indicates that the sages provide a twofold interpretation of the biblical phrase \u201cunder God\u2019s curse\u201d: one who curses God and the curse of God. The author of the Temple Scroll also seems to be offering a two-fold reading: hanging is the punishment for one who curses, and as a result the sinner is himself cursed. It should be noted that this interpretation may in part be rooted in Psalm 37:22: \u201c\u2026 those cursed by the Lord shall be cut off.\u201d The Hebrew for \u2018those cursed,\u2019 \u05de\u05e7\u05dc\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5, is written in defective orthography, and so could also be read as the active form, \u2018those who curse the Lord\u2019\u2014a reading that is, in fact, attested in the Septuagint.<br \/>\nWe have seen that both the Temple Scroll and the Damascus Document portray the cursers and the informants separately, while Seder \u02bfOlam includes both under the category of those who have \u201clifted their hands against the zevul.\u201d We may hypothesize that at one point, treason and cursing God were seen as two aspects of the same horrific wickedness, namely, rebellion against God and the People of God. Presumably, the evolution proceeded as follows: originally the crime in question was cursing God, but this was later expanded to include informants since their actions came to be seen as a type of blasphemy. Over time other transgressions of a fundamentally similar nature were appended to them, including the minim.<br \/>\nIn what follows we will try to unravel the basic significance of Birkat ha-Minim. But in order to do that we must first survey the path leading up to the benediction and propose a hypothesis regarding the evolution of the concept of the sinners condemned to eternal punishment. One key comment: the fact that a particular idea or motif reaches a new stage does not entail that its previous meaning simply disappears or ceases to be relevant. Often, it coexists alongside its heir.<br \/>\nIt appears that there was an early view that those who lifted their hand against the zevul, cursing God and God\u2019s glory, would not be granted forgiveness in this world or the next, and are condemned to an eternity in hell. This view is attested in 1 Enoch (20.1, and chapter 27) and in the logion of Jesus (Matt. 12:32). In the second stage, which occurred already in the Hasmonean times, the informants were added to the list, alongside the blasphemers. This stage is attested in the additional material from Qumran. The third stage involves a new and more precise definition of those who will receive such severe divine punishment: those who have rebelled against God\u2019s kingship and lost all hope of redemption are \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the community, for example the minim, the informers, the hypocrites and the heretics.\u201d We have here, then, the preliminary kernel of the discussion in Seder \u02bfOlam and its parallels. Still later the sages added other sinners to the list, a process whose genesis is in Mishnah Sanhedrin 1.10, and the result is the version attested in Seder \u02bfOlam. This text has been further reworked by the editor of the Tosefta, and is found in Tosefta Sanhedrin 13.5. Having set forth this preliminary outline, we can now turn to our main argument, that it was the third stage, focusing on the eternal punishment of those who \u201cseparate themselves from the path of the community,\u201d that provides the conceptual backdrop to Birkat ha-Minim.<\/p>\n<p>III. The Various Versions of Birkat ha-Minim<\/p>\n<p>Elbogen famously stated that \u201c[n]o benediction has undergone as many textual variations as this one,\u201d and at first glance he would appear to be correct. A closer examination, however, reveals that the situation is not so desperate. There are, essentially, two core versions of the blessing: the regular, \u201cBabylonian\u201d version, and the version preserved in the Cairo Genizah, namely, the Byzantine Palestinian version. The following is the Ashkenazic version in its original form:<\/p>\n<p>May the informants have no hope<br \/>\nAnd all the minim instantly perish<br \/>\nAnd all your enemies speedily be cut off<br \/>\nAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted, and broken,<br \/>\nand vanquished in our days.<br \/>\nBlessed are You O Lord, who breaks enemies and vanquishes<br \/>\nthe wicked.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the blessing as found in the Yemenite liturgy, which has its origins in Maimonides\u2019 version:<\/p>\n<p>May the apostates have no hope<br \/>\nAnd all the minim and the informants (\u05de\u05d5\u05e1\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd) instantly perish<br \/>\nAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted and broken in our days.<br \/>\nBlessed are You Lord, who breaks enemies and vanquishes<br \/>\nthe wicked.<\/p>\n<p>There are four extant witnesses to the Palestinian version of Birkat ha-Minim, two of one kind and two of another. This is the format of the first kind:<\/p>\n<p>May the apostates have no hope<br \/>\nAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted in our days<br \/>\nAnd the Christians and the minim instantly perish.<br \/>\nLet them be erased from the Book of Life and not be recorded<br \/>\nalongside the righteous.<br \/>\nBlessed are You Lord, who vanquishes the wicked.<\/p>\n<p>Here is the second form of Birkat ha-Minim in the ancient Palestinian format:<\/p>\n<p>May the apostates have no hope, if they do not return to your Torah,<br \/>\nAnd the Christians and the minim perish;<br \/>\nLet them be erased from the Book of Life and not be recorded<br \/>\nalongside the righteous.<br \/>\nBlessed are You Lord, who vanquishes the wicked.<\/p>\n<p>The two Palestinian versions differ in that the second lacks the phrase \u201cAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted in our days,\u201d and in its place, following the opening statement \u201cmay the apostates have no hope,\u201d there appears the qualification: \u201cif they do not return to your Torah.\u201d This renewed hope for the apostates is part and parcel of the more humane attitude that took root in the time of the Tannaim and the Amoraim, and is in the spirit of Rabbi Aqiva. According to this sage, even the worst sinners, whose sins are never atoned for, are granted forgiveness if they repent prior to their death. And yet, the first chapter indicated that the punishment meted out to these sinners is eternal and absolute, and thus we see that the moderate and more merciful approach stands in tension with the core idea of Birkat ha-Minim, which is attested in all its versions: \u201cLet the apostates (and the like) have no hope.\u201d We may conclude, then, that the phrase \u201cif they do not return to your Torah\u201d is a secondary addition, indeed, one not attested in all the Palestinian witnesses of Birkat ha-Minim.<br \/>\nThe other difference between the Palestinian versions is, as noted, that the second lacks the petition for the destruction of the \u201cwicked kingdom,\u201d even though this is clearly part of the prayer, since it appears in almost all the other versions. It is absent from the two Genizah texts, but even they end with the conclusion \u201cwho vanquishes the wicked (\u05de\u05db\u05e0\u05d9\u05e2 \u05d6\u05d3\u05d9\u05dd).\u201d We may assume, then, that the omission of the \u201cwicked kingdom\u201d phrase and the appearance of the merciful statement in its stead in the two Genizah witnesses, is sheer coincidence. After all, we only have four Genizah texts that include Birkat ha-Minim, and there is no possibility of reaching any sustainable conclusions with such a small sample. On the other hand, the conclusion is identical in all four Palestinian texts: \u201cBlessed are You O Lord, who vanquishes the wicked.\u201d This, in contrast to the longer conclusion of the standard \u201cBabylonian\u201d conclusion: \u201cBlessed are You O Lord, who breaks enemies and vanquishes the wicked.\u201d This, indeed, is the concluding statement in all the \u201cBabylonian\u201d traditions. Only the modern Sephardic Jews of North Africa occasionally replace the word \u2018wicked\u2019 with minim, but this is undoubtedly a late change. Incidentally, the fact that the word minim does not appear in any of the original concluding statements of the blessing, leads us to conclude that the name Birkat ha-Minim was not appended to the blessing from the outset, and we shall return to this theme below.<br \/>\nTwo more comments must be made regarding the language of Birkat ha-Minim. The first concerns the term \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd, \u2018informants.\u2019 We already noted that the verb \u05dc\u05d4\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05df is attested in rabbinic Hebrew, but not the nominal form \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05df. It is no surprise, then, that this form is not found in many of the versions of Birkat ha-Minim, since it is a late form and was incorporated into the blessing when the nominal form gained currency, in the Hebrew of the Middle Ages. The earlier form is \u05de\u05d5\u05e1\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea (or \u05de\u05d5\u05e1\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd), which is current in early rabbinic Hebrew. This term also appears in the list of sinners in Seder \u02bfOlam and its rabbinic parallels, where it stands for the later \u05de\u05dc\u05e9\u05d9\u05e0\u05d9\u05dd. And rightly so, since the informants, \u05de\u05d5\u05e1\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea, are a natural part of Birkat ha-Minim, which was originally composed precisely against them. Thus it is odd that the informants do not appear in the list of sinners of Birkat ha-Minim in the Palestinian version, nor in the version of Rav Saadia Gaon, and apparently not in those of Maimonides or Rav Amram Gaon. I believe this pseudo-problem can be resolved if we assume that at different times and different places, the informants were omitted from Birkat ha-Minim since they now represented the most severe and the most immediate danger to the Jewish people.<br \/>\nThe second comment concerns the word \u2018Christians,\u2019 which is juxtaposed with minim in the early Palestinian versions and, for whatever reason, in the liturgy of Rav Amram Gaon. Scholars today agree, and rightly so, that the Christians were not mentioned in the original Birkat ha-Minim. There seems to be no need, today, to argue against the old view, that Birkat ha-Minim was incorporated into the Amidah prayer at Yavne (Jamnia) in order to exclude the Christians from Israel as a whole; it has been widely discredited. We will return to the question of when and why Birkat ha-Minim was composed, but regarding the word \u2018Christians\u2019 it is clear that it was not erased by Christian (or internal) censors, since it is absent in the liturgy of communities in non-Christian countries as well, even when these countries contain sizable Christian minorities against whom the blessing could be aimed. Justin Martyr (circa 165 C.E.) states repeatedly that the Jews in their synagogues curse those who believe in Jesus, suggesting that Birkat ha-Minim was current in his day and aimed primarily at Christianity, which was, at the time, the largest Jewish sect. Of course, it also broke the geographic boundaries of Israel and spread among the nations of the world. A few years before Justin\u2019s statements, one of the sages foresaw the future developments and likened Christianity\u2019s conquest of the world to a \u2018yellow peril\u2019\u2014a sign that the eschaton was at hand. \u201cWith the footprints of the Messiah, presumption shall increase and dearth reach its height \u2026 the empire shall fall into heresy and there shall be none to utter reproof.\u201d Of course, this does not mean that the word \u2018Christians\u2019 was used in Birkat ha-Minim. However, the testimonies of Epiphanius (died 403 C.E.) and Jerome (died 420 C.E.) indicate that \u2018Christians\u2019 were named in Birkat ha-Minim no later than the fourth century. Justin Martyr, Epiphanius and Jerome all spent a significant part of their lives in Israel, and it stands to reason that their statements are a reflection of the situation there.<br \/>\nTo summarize this last point: Birkat ha-Minim predates the emergence of Christianity, and its original form could not have referred to Christians. Christians are only mentioned in the liturgy of Byzantine Palestine, but their inclusion in the blessing occurred no later than the fourth century C.E. It further appears that only the Palestinian liturgy of the time mentions the Christians, and this custom did not spread to any other community. Note that \u2018Christians\u2019 precedes the minim in the Palestinian versions of Birkat ha-Minim, proof, to my mind, that the word is a secondary insertion.<br \/>\nNow that we have established that the \u201cChristian Question\u201d is not central to Birkat ha-Minim, we must examine the different versions anew, without trying to reconstruct a single, original version. Rather, we shall first examine the different epithets that designate those who revolt against the kingship of heaven. We have seen that neither the Christians nor the informants belong to the early stratum of Birkat ha-Minim, and we will devote a separate discussion to the \u201cwicked kingdom\u201d that appears in the main body of the blessing. The minim are always mentioned, naturally, along with the informants, while the apostates are cited in the opening line in Maimonides (and the Yemenite liturgy), Rav Saadia Gaon, and the Palestinian liturgy. There are, of course, other derogatory names, but it is no coincidence that we again come across the minim, the informants and the apostates, who make up three of the four types of sinner in the enumeration of Seder \u02bfOlam. The hypocrites (\u05d7\u05e0\u05e4\u05d9\u05dd) do not appear in any version of Birkat ha-Minim, since the later semantic development of the word made it unfit for the blessing.<br \/>\nThe first line of the benediction\u2014in all extant versions\u2014expresses the hope that those against whom the blessing is aimed \u201chave no hope.\u201d This is undoubtedly one of the important foci of the blessing, and further evidence that the blessing originally grew out of the same conceptual soil as Seder \u02bfOlam. Namely, the view that \u201cthose who separate themselves from the community, for example the minim, informers, hypocrites and heretics \u2026 will be locked in hell and they will be judged in it for all eternity, forevermore.\u201d They have no hope for divine forgiveness. Thus, Seder \u02bfOlam and its parallels aid us in understanding the intent of Birkat ha-Minim. Needless to say, this is not the only time that an account of how things are or ought be, finds expression in liturgy in the form of a petitionary prayer.<br \/>\nIf so, one of the main goals of Birkat ha-Minim is to express in liturgy the wish that there be \u201cno hope\u201d for those who separate themselves from the community. But at some later time, another goal was incorporated and Birkat ha-Minim was no longer aimed against Jews who set themselves apart from the Jewish people as a whole (and cooperate with the foreign conqueror), but rather against the wicked and haughty themselves (that is, the \u2018wicked kingdom,\u2019 i.e., the Roman Empire). All the extant versions of the blessing (except for two of the four Genizah versions) express the hope that \u201cthe wicked kingdom be uprooted.\u201d The title \u201cwicked kingdom\u201d (\u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05d5\u05ea \u05d6\u05d3\u05d5\u05df) does not necessarily refer to the Roman Empire, but could apply to any wicked gentile government before or after the Roman period. Already in Jeremiah (50:31\u201332) the word \u05d6\u05d3\u05d5\u05df refers to Babylon, while Ben Sira (35:22\u201323) prays for a future time in which God will uproot the wicked government of the gentiles from the world:<\/p>\n<p>God indeed will not delay<br \/>\nand like a warrior will not be still<br \/>\nTill he breaks the backs of the merciless<br \/>\nand wreaks vengeance upon the nations<br \/>\nTill he destroys the scepter of the wicked<br \/>\nand breaks off short the staff of the sinner<\/p>\n<p>So great is the similarity between Ben Sira\u2019s words and Birkat ha-Minim\u2019s hope that the wicked kingdom be uprooted, that it is impossible to reject out of hand the possibility that Ben Sira\u2019s words influence Birkat ha-Minim indirectly, or, alternately, that both are drawing from a third, common source.<br \/>\nDoes the juxtaposition of two distinct goals in Birkat ha-Minim\u2014the one against those who separate themselves from the community, the other against the wicked kingdom\u2014indicate that it was once made up of two separate blessings? As we will see, the main changes in the Amidah were made on account of the plurality and flexibility of the benedictions, so it is difficult to suppose that Birkat ha-Minim could have undergone fundamental changes post-Yavne. By \u2018plurality and flexibility\u2019 I mean the different possible permutations of prayers and blessings, varying from custom to custom and even from individual to individual. Indeed, it appears to have been possible to deconstruct one of the Eighteen Benedictions to two or more distinct blessings. We will see that this was in fact done with Birkat ha-Minim, and indeed our structural analysis suggests that the blessing includes two distinct components: one aimed against the minim and one aimed against the wicked kingdom. In light of the extant evidence it is certainly possible that the blessing against the minim was, at some point, inserted into the blessing against the wicked kingdom, or vice versa.<br \/>\nIn order to verify this claim, we propose an experimental reconstruction of a prototype of Birkat ha-Minim, one that includes all the extant versions. This hypothetical reconstruction is based on the two forms of the \u201cBabylonian\u201d version:<\/p>\n<p>May the apostates have no hope<br \/>\nAnd all the minim and the informants instantly perish<br \/>\nAnd all your enemies speedily be cut off<br \/>\nAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted and broken in our days.<br \/>\nBlessed are You O Lord, who breaks enemies and vanquishes<br \/>\nthe wicked.<\/p>\n<p>There is no doubt that the ancient version of the fourth line was \u201cAnd may the wicked kingdom be uprooted and broken in our days.\u201d The material we have examined thus far (as well as other considerations) indicates that the word \u05ea\u05de\u05d2\u05e8 in the Ashkenazic liturgy is a secondary addition. In addition we have seen that in a number of versions the word \u05d5\u05ea\u05db\u05e0\u05d9\u05e2 found its way from the conclusion of the blessing into the main body. As a result, Birkat ha-Minim, which was originally phrased in a third person, passive voice (except for the conclusion, of course) became a supplication of God!<br \/>\nAlmost all the extant versions open with the word apostates. It is unclear, however, whether the phrase \u201cand all your enemies speedily be cut off,\u201d which appears only in the liturgy of Ashkenazic Jewry, is original or a secondary addition. This much is clear: the bi-partite \u201cBabylonian\u201d conclusion is to be preferred to the shorter, Palestinian conclusion, \u201cBlessed are You Lord, who vanquishes the wicked,\u201d as it appears the original conclusion referred to two opponents: the enemies and the wicked. These \u2018wicked\u2019 are, of course, identical with the \u2018wicked kingdom\u2019 that is mentioned in the main body of the blessing, while the \u2018enemies\u2019 are internal, e.g., minim. If we accept the authenticity of the third line of the reconstructed prayer\u2014a line found only in the Ashkenazic liturgy\u2014we find that the main body of the blessing also refers to the minim and their ilk by means of the word \u2018enemies.\u2019 Note that the mentioning of two elements in the conclusion of Birkat ha-Minim is unparalleled: the other conclusions in the Amidah have only one subject, except for the Palestinian version of the blessing for Jerusalem that refers to \u201cthe God of David, the builder of Jerusalem.\u201d But even there the phrase \u201cGod of David\u201d was famously inserted as a new subject. If the \u201cBabylonian\u201d conclusion is, then, correct, this may be an indication that the version of Birkat ha-Minim that we have today emerged as a synthesis of two originally distinct blessings.<br \/>\nWorking on the assumption that Birkat ha-Minim is composed of two originally different blessings, I elsewhere proposed that the juxtaposition of these two was done in the time of Yavne (Jamnia), by Shmuel the Lesser. I further proposed that the purpose of this juxtaposition was not to further increase the people\u2019s hatred of the Roman Empire that had destroyed Jerusalem, but to the contrary: if the various \u201cseparatists\u201d (\u05e4\u05d5\u05e8\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd) appear in the blessing alongside the wicked kingdom, it follows that they are rebuked just as sharply as the hated Romans. In any case, there is no evidence to suggest that Birkat ha-Minim was composed during the Yavne period in order to check whether a person leading the prayer service was a min. The closest we find is the following statement concerning the congregational prayer leader: \u201cOne does not insist that he begin a prayer anew [in the case of an error], except if he did not say the benedictions \u2018Who resurrects the dead\u2019 or \u2018Who vanquishes the wicked\u2019 or \u2018Who builds Jerusalem\u2019,\u201d for fear that he is a min. The repetition of the prayer is justified as follows: if the prayer leader is indeed a min, he will be cursing himself and the congregation will answer \u2018amen.\u2019 But even if we accept this discussion as historically accurate, there is still no indication that the blessing was composed in order to ferret out the minim and expel them from the congregation.<br \/>\nMy hypothesis notwithstanding, I must admit that there is no clear-cut evidence regarding what decisions were made at Yavne regarding Birkat ha-Minim. This much I do consider certain: Birkat ha-Minim in its present form is a composite of a blessing against the wicked kingdom, and another that states that those who separate themselves from the community have no hope. This assumption is supported by a passage in t. Berakhot 3.25\u2014which admittedly raises a whole new set of problems\u2014that states: \u201cOne may include the benediction of the minim in that of the separatists, and the benediction of the gentiles in that of the elders, and the benediction of David in that of Jerusalem. And if one said each as a blessing unto itself, he has fulfilled his legal obligation.\u201d Incidentally, this passage is a testament to a comment we made earlier, namely that congregants had the freedom to disassemble the individual benedictions of the Amidah and produce two separate benedictions, or to the contrary, to unite two or more into a single benediction. Here are Lieberman\u2019s comments concerning the beginning of the passage: \u201cThus we learn that this benediction (Birkat ha-Minim in its original form) was originally a curse against the perushim \u2026 that is, against individuals whose custom it was to set themselves apart (\u05dc\u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9) \u2026 in dire straits \u2026 this curse was aimed against all the sects and individuals who threatened the unity of the community. The benediction against the separatists existed long before Shmuel the Small, as he was the one who fixed the benediction so as to explicitly mention the minim, since they started to threaten the community as a whole. It had existed as an independent benediction, which allowed the Tosefta to state in what follows that if an individual said these as a unit unto themselves he fulfilled his religious obligation.\u201d It should be noted that for the Hebrew speakers of the day, the word \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9 is semantically equivalent to \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9, as we find in other intransitive verbs such as \u05e8\u05db\u05d5\u05d1-\u05e8\u05d5\u05db\u05d1.<br \/>\nIt is clear enough why, over time, the word \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd was omitted from Birkat ha-Minim. For one thing, the meaning of the word was no longer current, a dynamic we saw with the word \u05d7\u05e0\u05e3 (hypocrite). More importantly, the rabbinic Sages came to be called \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd, and we will see below that they were unhappy with this epithet on account of its negative connotations. Nonetheless, the passage in the Tosefta demonstrates that even those who came to be known by this epithet continued to speak of the \u05e4\u05e8\u05d5\u05e9\u05d9\u05dd as a derogatory term, i.e., as those who separate themselves from the community. This is an important finding for the history of the word. In any case, they preferred to omit the word from Birkat ha-Minim, even while Seder \u02bfOlam and its parallels indicate that the phrase \u201cthose who separate themselves from the community\u201d was once the phrase used to describe those who chose to break with the Jewish community\u2014thus it was appropriate for the term to appear in Birkat ha-Minim.<br \/>\nSaul Lieberman\u2019s hypothesis, that there was once a benediction aimed against those who separate themselves from the community, and that Shmuel the Small \u201cfixed the benediction so as to explicitly mention the minim,\u201d is based on the accepted text of t. Berakhot 3.25: \u201cOne may include the benediction of the minim in that of the separatists,\u201d and this is in fact attested in the extant manuscripts of the Tosefta. But early citations of this passage reflect a different text altogether: \u201cOne may include the benediction of the minim and of the separatists in that of \u2018vanquishes the wicked.\u2019&nbsp;\u201d This version fits perfectly with our hypothesis, that Birkat ha-Minim was composed of two distinct benedictions. The one expressed hope for the speedy uprooting of the wicked kingdom, while the other aimed at those who had separated from the community (the perushim), with the minim constituting an organic part of this list. In order to better understand this dynamic, then, it is necessary to consider the emotional and social response of the Jewish people as a whole to those who, to their mind, separated from the community.<\/p>\n<p>IV. Those Who Separate from the Community<\/p>\n<p>We have established that those who separate from the community were referred to in brief as \u2018separatists,\u2019 perushim. We will have opportunity to touch on the paradox that the name perushim has come to be associated with the rabbinic sages, as they were\u2014at the apex of their power\u2014the outstanding representatives of Jewish unity, and fierce opponents of any who broke with Israel. \u201cDo not separate yourself (p-r-sh) from the community\u201d says Hillel the Elder (m. Avot 2.4)\u2014though perhaps this is a warning aimed at the House of Shammai, whose halakhic strictures run the risk of insularity and detachment. This is not the place to discuss the historical value of the story in Avot of Rabbi Nathan, regarding the genesis of the Sadducees and the Boethusians. According to this legend, Antigonos of Socho had two disciples, Saddoq and Boethus, who misunderstood their master\u2019s dictum that one should not worship God for the sake of wages or reward (Avot 1.3), thinking that it meant that resurrection is not the reward of the righteous. As a result, \u201cthey went and set themselves apart (pirshu; other versions read \u2018set themselves apart from the Law\u2019) and two divisions emerged from them\u2014the Sadducees and the Boethusians.\u201d The story undoubtedly existed prior to the redaction of Avot de Rabbi Nathan, since its kernel has been preserved in a composition from the Jewish-Christian Ebionites. There we find the following statement, that was undoubtedly composed in the Tannaitic era: \u201cThe Sadducees \u2026 began to separate themselves (lifrosh) from the people as a whole and to deny the doctrine of resurrection \u2026 saying that it is not right to worship God for the sake of wages or reward.\u201d This is a more original source of the same idea found at the basis of the story of the formation of the Sadducees and the Boethusians in Avot de Rabbi Nathan. Moreover, both texts say that they separated themselves because they rejected the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead.<br \/>\nHatred toward the \u201cseparatists\u201d found its way into the legal ruling in tractate Semahot (2.10): \u201cWe do not occupy ourselves with those who separated themselves from the community in any respect.\u201d There were those who took this reasoning one step further and decreed that this verse from Psalms excludes those who separate themselves from the community from the golden rule to love one\u2019s neighbor; to the contrary, it calls for hatred: \u201cLove everyone but hate the minim and the apostates and the informants\u201d\u2014followed by a discussion of Psalm 139:21\u201322\u2014\u201cas it is written, \u2018you shall love your neighbor as yourself\u2019 (Lev. 19:18).\u2026 If he acts according to the norms of your people, love him, if not, do not love him.\u201d This same verse is adduced by Rabbi Ishmael in the discussion of Gospels and the books of the minim. It would appear that the term minim refers here to a particular Christian group, of whom it is said, inter alia, that their writings \u201ccause hatred between Israel and their heavenly father.\u201d As for the statement that if a person \u201cacts according to the norms of your people, love him, if not, do not love him\u201d\u2014it appears to be influenced by an interpretation of another verse: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018You shall not put a curse on a chieftain among your people\u2019 (Exod. 22:28). This refers to one who comports himself in accordance with the customs of your people, but excludes those who separate themselves from the community, e.g., Jeroboam ben Nabat,\u201d while the parallels read \u201cthe norms of your people.\u201d Rabbinic law follows a similar logic and employs a similar terminology in discussing Sadducee women: \u201cThe daughters of the Sadducees, if they follow after the ways of their fathers, are deemed like to the women of the Samaritans; but if they have separated themselves and follow after the ways of Israel, they are deemed like to the women of Israel.\u201d<br \/>\nWe find, then, a web of interrelated terms, and our focus is on those who separate, one way or another, from the community, and are no longer comporting themselves according to the norms of the Jewish people. The worst of these, the ones whose behavior is opposed to that of the people, are the object of Psalm 139:21\u201322, that is, they are counted among the enemies of the Lord and as such worthy of hatred. No surprise, then, that the Benediction against the \u201cSeparatists\u201d (perushim)\u2014whose main thrust is to deny any future hope for these sinners\u2014was formulated against such individuals, who revolt against the kingdom of heaven. Those who separate themselves from the community, the minim and the apostates and the informants and the hypocrites, are damned to eternal hell.<\/p>\n<p>V. The Epithet Perushim<\/p>\n<p>It is clear from the above discussion that the group known as perushim (that is, Pharisees) included in their liturgy the wish that the perushim (that is, those who separate themselves from the community) have no hope, and clearly this unusual state of affairs is relevant to the origin and meaning of the epithet \u2018perushim\u2019. As such, we must discuss, even if only briefly, the term perushim as it applies to the Jewish sages. In truth, the epithet is inherently ambiguous: perushim can serve as a derogatory term (a poresh, one who separates himself) when employed by the opposing camp, or as praise by members of the sect. As Yehiel of Rome states: \u201cA parush is one who separates himself from all forms of impurity and from improper food and from ignoramuses who are not strict regarding dietary restrictions.\u201d This positive meaning is also attested in \u2018Fear of Sin\u2019 (\u05d9\u05e8\u05d0\u05ea \u05d7\u05d8\u05d0), one of the so-called \u2018minor tractates\u2019: \u201cThe ignoramus (\u02bfam ha-\u2019aretz) is not parush (that is, strict in distancing himself from impurities).\u201d Do these sources, and other like them, indicate that the sages, who \u201ceat their unsanctified meats in a state of purity,\u201d coined this term to set themselves apart from the people as a whole? I have not found any explicit articulation of this view in the ancient sources.<br \/>\nIn contrast to the Essene sect at Qumran, there is no evidence of a separatist tendency among the Pharisees. Quite the contrary: their power and the secret of their success lie in their ability to identify with popular beliefs and with the practical application of the Torah according to the customs of the Jewish people as a whole. It was thanks to this that the Pharisees were able to advance and shape the course of Jewish history. In light of this, it is difficult to suppose that these people flaunted their separateness from the Jewish people, and chose to call themselves perushim in the sense of \u201cthose who separate themselves from the community.\u201d It is far more likely, that as the Pharisaic movement crystallized, its conservative opponents saw it as a threat to the unity of Israel, as a group that separated itself from the community, as \u2018perushim\u2019 This epithet undoubtedly offended the Pharisees, and while there were sporadic attempts to re-semantize the term\u2014proposing a positive sense, especially in the area of purity\u2014they generally rejected the term. Indeed, they continued to use perushim in reference to those who separated themselves from the community, a custom that was even fixed in their liturgy.<br \/>\nIt is clear, then, why the derogatory term perushim is attested more frequently in the words of the Pharisees\u2019 opponents. This is, in any case, the conclusion to be drawn from the story of Alexander Jannaeus, a story preserved in b. Qiddushim 66a, based on an ancient written source. The story tells of a dispute between the king and the Pharisees. At the outset of the dispute, an opponent of the sages addresses the king, saying: \u201cThe hearts of the Pharisees are against you.\u201d As a result of the dispute, \u201call the sages of Israel were massacred, and the world was desolate until Shimon ben Shetah came and restored the Torah to its pristine glory.\u201d Here (and in the beginning of the story), the Pharisees are specifically referred to as \u201call the sages of Israel.\u201d Another aggadic source tells of Shimon ben Shetah, and how he restored the Torah to its former glory: \u201cThe Sadducees were seated at the Sanhedrin, and King Jannaeus and Queen Salome were seated there, and not one of Israel was seated with them, except for Shimon ben Shetah.\u201d When none of the Sadducee members of the Sanhedrin was able to provide a scriptural proof for a particular decision, Shimon ben Shetah caused \u201call of them to depart, and so a Sanhedrin of Israel was established. The day that the Sadducee Sanhedrin was disbanded and a Sanhedrin of Israel was established was declared a holiday.\u201d If the previous story referred to the Pharisee sages as \u201cthe sages of Israel,\u201d here they are simply referred to as \u201cIsrael\u201d simpliciter! The sages are also referred to as perushim in m. Yadayim 4.6\u20138 by their opponents. In mishnahs 4 and 7 the Sadducees say: \u201cWe cry out against you, O Pharisees \u2026\u201d while a Galilean heretic similarly states, \u201cI cry out against you, O Pharisees.\u2026\u201d<br \/>\nThus we see that the epithet perushim generally carried a bitter taste in their own mouths, due to its negative content. It is especially worth noting that rabbinic literature never identifies even one of the sages as a perushi-Pharisee, while Greek sources do designate certain Jews this way. The most prominent of these are the Jewish men who attest\u2014in Greek\u2014to their Pharisaism, namely Paul (Philippians 3:5, and see Acts 23:6), and Josephus (Vita \u00a710). The New Testament also refers to the following figures as Pharisees: Nicodemus, who is probably identical with the famous Naqdimon ben Gurion (John 3:1), and Rabban Gamaliel the Elder (Acts 5:34). Josephus characterizes the latter\u2019s son, Shimon ben Gamaliel (Vita \u00a7191), as well as Samaias and Pollion, two prominent Pharisees who lived under Herod (AJ 15.4, 370), and are undoubtedly to be identified with Shammai and Hillel. In addition, Josephus names three Pharisees who were sent from Jerusalem to the Galilee during the war (Vita \u00a7197). Incidentally, these Greek sources prove that the scholars were right to suggest that the Patriarchate and the remaining sages of the Second Temple and post-70 were Pharisees.<br \/>\nThe Greek sources did not hesitate to designate the \u201crabbinic\u201d sages as Pharisees\u2014in contrast to the silence of the Talmudic sources\u2014because the resistance to the epithet perushim was weaker, or perhaps non-existent, outside of the circle of the sages themselves. Presumably, the Hebrew and Aramaic-speaking Jews of Palestine, those who were not counted among the enemies of the Pharisees, also came to see \u2018Pharisees,\u2019 perushim, as a neutral term, with no negative connotation. In any case, the sages were referred to as \u2018Pharisees\u2019 by the surrounding environment, and they did not like it.<br \/>\nIn the meantime\u2014at some point no later than the reign of Alexander Jannaeus\u2014the Pharisees won the trust of the vast majority of the Jewish people, and came to serve as its leaders. The rival Essenes saw the great influence of the Pharisees as a calamity. They interpret the worship of the Canaanite god Ba\u2019al during the reign of Hosea (2:10) as referring to the complete dependence of the masses on the Pharisees: \u201cBut they listened to those who misdirected them and they acclaimed them, and feared them in their blindness like god.\u201d Under these circumstances it would be ridiculous to rebuke the Pharisees as having separated themselves from the people as a whole, but the negative connotation of perushim still lingered, only now directed in new channels: in various circles there circulated the view that the Pharisees were hypocrites, and this accusation was voiced against the Pharisees by Sadducees and Essenes alike; Jesus too accused the Pharisees of hypocrisy, and there is self-criticism along these lines from the Pharisees themselves. It is of course no coincidence that the Pharisees\u2014or part of them\u2014appeared to such a varied group of people as hypocrites who pretend to be righteous. It is not our role to examine the underlying reality of this accusation against the Pharisee character, which was interpreted by many as hypocrisy. It may be that the problematic tendency among the Pharisees\u2014and which was generalized by their opponents as characteristic of the group as a whole\u2014has its roots in the positive role of the sages. Not only did they take it upon themselves to live according to the Halakhah, down to its smallest details, but they even managed, for a time, to cast the yoke of Halakhah on the people as a whole. Over time, arrangements such as these inevitably lead to tension between the strict demands of the party faithful and their own limited capacity to live according to these demands. There are some among them who appear to make demands but not meet them (see Matt. 23:3) or, in other words, who appear as hypocrites. This social dynamic was evident among the Pharisees themselves, and explains the hypocrisy within their ranks. Such negative phenomena presumably disappeared from the world of the Jewish sages after the destruction of the Temple, that is, when there was no longer any possibility to challenge \u201crabbinic\u201d Judaism, or its dominion over the Jewish people.<br \/>\nLet us deal briefly with the image of the Pharisees as hypocrites. The phrase originates in the words of Alexander Jannaeus, the Sadducee king, to his wife: \u201cfear not the Pharisees \u2026 but the hypocrites who ape the Pharisees; because their deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Pinhas\u201d (b. Sotah 22b). The meaning of \u2018hypocrites\u2019 may be inferred from the words of Jesus in Matthew 23:27\u201328: \u201cWoe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but on the inside they are full of the bones of the dead and of all kinds of filth.\u201d A similar image appears in the Damascus Document (8.12, and in a parallel passage at 19.25), where the Essenes call the Pharisees \u201cthe builders of the wall \u2026 those who daub with whitewash\u201d\u2014a clear allusion to Ezekiel 13:10. I have shown elsewhere, that the Qumranites viewed the entire Pharisee community in a negative light, as a movement whose hypocrisy finds expression in its fallacious teachings as well: they are \u201cthose who misdirect Ephraim, who with their fraudulent teaching and lying tongue and perfidious lip misdirect many; kings, princes, priests and people together with the proselyte attached to them. Cities and clans will perish through their advice, nobles and leaders will fall due to the ferocity of their tongues\u201d (4QpNah 2.8\u201310). A more moderate approach is adopted by the Sadducee king, at least according to b. Sotah 22b, where Alexander Jannaeus speaks of those \u201cwhose deeds are the deeds of Zimri but they expect a reward like Pinhas.\u201d That is, he is referring to individuals who are only apparent\u2014not true\u2014Pharisees. Jesus\u2019 statement offers still another approach, as he describes the Pharisees as hypocrites, but at the same time admits that they sit on the throne of Moses. He accepts their teachings as binding, but claims that their actions do not match their teachings. Jesus\u2019 description of the Pharisees raises the question, How could he have identified with their teachings, in light of his sharp polemic against them? This apparent paradox is probably best explained if we assume that Jesus was, like Honi the Circle Drawer, a righteous charismatic who belonged to the world of the sages but did not identify with their \u201cestablishment.\u201d<br \/>\nJesus levels the following accusation, inter alia, against the Pharisees: \u201cThey tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on the shoulders of others; but they themselves are unwilling to lift a finger to move them\u201d (Matt. 23:4). There is an important parallel to Jesus\u2019 statement in the list of \u201cseven perushim,\u201d five of which are negative and the last two\u2014\u201cthe parush characterized by fear and the parush characterized by love\u201d\u2014are positive, and the one who worships God out of love is preferred to one who worships out of fear. The first five types of Pharisees are characterized as different forms of hypocrisy. The first is \u201cthe shoulder parush,\u201d a term that is glossed as \u201cloads the commandments (\u05de\u05e2\u05d5\u05d5\u05ea\u05d0) on the shoulder.\u201d The parallel in Matthew 23:4 suggests that this phrase refers to a Pharisee who loads the commandments on the shoulders of others\u2014an instance in which Jesus\u2019 teachings provide a novel insight into the Talmudic statement. As noted, the first five types of perushim, separatists, are described as various types of religious hypocrisy, and it stands to reason that the list originally included seven similar types of negative religious behavior, but was later changed to include two positive types. Jesus may have known the list in its earlier form, since his critique of the Pharisees contains seven instances of \u201cWoe!\u201d (Matt. 23:13, 15, 16, 23, 25, 27, 29). In any case, there is an undeniable affinity\u2014conceptual and substantive alike\u2014between Jesus\u2019 discussion of the Pharisees and the list of \u201cseven perushim\u201d in the Palestinian Talmud. The main difference appears to be that the Talmud is voicing an internal critique that sages level against themselves, while Jesus is an outsider, who respects the Pharisees but is also critical of them. For the present discussion it should be remembered that pre-70 there were many who claimed that the Pharisees are hypocrites. Indeed, this claim circulated so widely, that the sages themselves adopted the name \u2018Pharisees\u2019 for the hypocrites among them.<\/p>\n<p>VI. The Separatism of the Essenes<\/p>\n<p>The history of the term perushim, \u2018Pharisees,\u2019 provides an interesting example of the tangled ways of an ideology. We already noted that the term is ambiguous: it can serve as a pejorative designation of those who have separated themselves from the community, but can also be used by a separatist group to mark their laudable decision to divorce themselves from the Jewish people as a whole, who are doomed to perish. The sages employ the pejorative sense in the benediction against the perushim. Over time, as the vast majority of the Jewish people came to accept the authority of the Pharisees, this name no longer suited them, and the sages generally avoided it when referring to themselves. Moreover, during the same time the word took on a new pejorative meaning\u2014no longer a reference to separatism, it became a marker of religious hypocrisy. Thus was the pejorative sense of perushim transformed. We will see in a moment that the Qumran community had no compunctions about applying the root \u2018parush\u2019 to separate themselves, in a decidedly positive meaning. Indeed, I will argue that the separatist sense of perushim originates in the Qumran community. Finally, we will revisit the hypothesis that Birkat ha-Minim was at one point aimed at the Essenes.<br \/>\nIt is an established fact that Qumran considered their separation from the community of sinners known as Israel to be a guiding principle, one rooted in their dualistic ideology and institutionalized in their separatist organization that was closed to all on the outside. A clear testament to this separatism is found in the following passage from one of the scrolls, which reads:<\/p>\n<p>14.      Midrash of \u201cHappy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked\u201d (Psalm 1:1). The interpretation of this word: they are those who turn aside from the path of the wicked<br \/>\n15.      as it is written in the book of Isaiah, the prophet, for the last days: \u201cthe Lord spoke to me while his hand was strong upon me, and removed me from the path of<br \/>\n16.      this people\u201d (Isa. 8:11). And (this refers to) those about whom it is written in the book of Ezekiel, the prophet, that \u201cthey should not defile themselves any more with all<br \/>\n17.      their idols\u201d (Ezek. 44:10). This refers to the sons of Zadok and to the men of their council, those who seek justice eagerly, who have come after them to the council of the community.<\/p>\n<p>The Qumran community thought that in divorcing themselves from the Jewish people they were abiding by the instruction of the opening of the Psalms: \u201cHappy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked, or take the path that sinners tread.\u201d In other words, they consider the rest of Israel to be wicked and sinful. In this passage, only the first hemistich is quoted explicitly, but the second is also relevant: the Qumran author identifies the Psalmist\u2019s \u201cpath that sinners tread\u201d with \u201cthe path of this people\u201d in Isaiah 8:11, the path from which they have divorced themselves, as per God\u2019s will. The separatism is justified by Ezekiel 37:23: they have separated themselves from the path of the people lest they \u201cdefile themselves \u2026 with their idols.\u201d We see, then, that Essene separatism consists of two aspects, both of which appear in this passage. The first is religious and theological and consists of the Essene dualism that dictates that they steer clear of the path of the sons of darkness. The second is halakhic and ritual: the Essenes of Qumran considered the rest of Israel to be impure, and thus were required to set themselves apart lest they be contaminated by their idols. The temple too they considered impure: \u201cThey send votive offerings to the temple, but perform their sacrifices employing a different ritual of purification. For this reason they are barred from those precincts of the temple that are frequented by all the people and perform their rites by themselves\u201d (Josephus, AJ 18.19). I will have more to say about the halakhic justification in what follows.<br \/>\nThe words of Isaiah\u2014\u201cwhile his hand was strong upon me [the Lord] removed me from the path of this people\u201d (8:11)\u2014played a particularly important role in the Essene separatism set forth in the passage at hand. To be sure, the MT reads \u05d5\u05b0\u05d9\u05b4\u05e1\u05bc\u05e8\u05b7\u05e0\u05b4\u05d9, that is, \u2018he warned me,\u2019 but the reading \u05d5\u05d9\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05e0\u05d9, \u2018he removed me,\u2019 is reflected in a number of ancient translations, and is the reading attested in the complete Isaiah scroll discovered at Qumran (the relevant chapters are not extant in the other Isaiah scroll). We see, then, that the Qumran community considered this verse\u2014in its non-Masoretic form\u2014as a biblical justification for their break with the Jewish people as a whole. The community defined itself as \u201cthe sons of Zadok, the priests, and the men of their covenant who have turned away from the path of the nation\u201d (1Q28a [=1QRule of the Congregation] 1.2\u20133) or as \u201cthe congregation of all the sons of justice, those who establish the covenant, those who avoid walking on the path of the people\u201d (11Q13 [=11QMelchizedek] 2.24). At the same time, they accused their opponents that \u201cthey have rebelled with insolence, walking on the path of the wicked ones\u201d (CD 19.21, and the parallel at 8.8\u20139; see also CD 19.17 and the parallel at 8.4\u20135). We will return to this passage later in our discussion.<br \/>\nIn an earlier article, I argued roughly thus: the Essenes used Isaiah 8:11 to justify their separation from the people, and defined themselves as having removed themselves \u201cfrom the path of this people\u201d or, more succinctly, those who strayed from the path of the people. If we translate the biblical phrase into contemporary language, we would say that the Essenes are those who separated themselves from the way of the people. The similarity between this phrase and \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the people\u201d\u2014who stand in opposition to \u201cthem according to the norms of your people\u201d\u2014is striking. These phrases, then, are rooted in a sectarian interpretation of Isaiah, that originates among the Essenes, and perhaps among other sectarian groups, for whom removal \u201cfrom the path of this people\u201d is a statement of praise. For those who reject the separatist impetus, on the other hand, \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the people\u201d and later \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the community (\u05e2\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8)\u201d are understood as sharply pejorative. The individuals characterized in these statements can be referred to in a single term: perushim, \u2018separatists,\u2019 and this is the term that was eventually included in the benediction against the separatists, the minim, the apostates and the informants. In a fascinating development, this term was incorporated into the benediction by the group that was itself called by its opponents perushim, Pharisees!<br \/>\nThese suppositions have been largely substantiated by the publication of 4QMMT (4QMMTd Column C 6\u20138), where we find: \u201c[And you know that] we have separated ourselves from the majority of the people and [from their impurity] and from mingling in these affairs and from associating with them in these things.\u201d The passage in question, like the composition as a whole, survived only in fragmentary form, so it is not possible to determine the precise reasons cited as to why the sect separated itself from the people as a whole. This much is clear: the author of 4QMMT does not mention an ideological impetus for breaking with Israel, but rather refers to halakhic differences that brought about the rift. In discussing these differences the scroll lists primarily issues of ritual purity, of temple service, and of priesthood, with purity playing a central role in the latter two categories as well\u2014at least in the parts of 4QMMT that survived. In this respect, 4QMMT is similar to the material cited above, although there we found an ideological justification for separating from the people, alongside the ritual. The Qumran community removed itself from the path of the people not only so as not to \u201ctake the path that sinners tread\u201d but also so that they not defile themselves with their idols. Be that as it may, the phrase \u201cseparated ourselves from the majority of the people\u201d indicates that the Qumran authors employed the root p-r-sh to cast their separatism in a positive light\u2014the polar opposite of the use in the benediction of those termed perushim, \u2018Pharisees,\u2019 the sages themselves. Also relevant is the striking similarity between the boastful statement of the sect\u2014based on Isaiah 8:11\u2014that they separated themselves from the path of the people, and the sages\u2019 position that \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the people\u201d will not be forgiven by God. May we conclude, then, that at some point the sages identified the perushim of the benediction with the separatist Dead Sea community? I suggested this possibility already, and the phrase \u201cwe have separated ourselves from the majority of the people\u201d appears to support it.<\/p>\n<p>VII. Sadducees, Essenes, and Pharisees in the Amidah<\/p>\n<p>In order to better understand the logic behind the hypothesis that Birkat ha-Minim was once aimed against the Essenes, we need to trace the original meaning of two of the benedictions in the Amidah: the one that precedes Birkat ha-Minim, and the one that follows it. The benediction preceding Birkat ha-Minim is brief, and, according to Rav Saadia Gaon, consists of the following: \u201cReturn our judges as before and our advisors as in earlier days\u201d (based on Isaiah 1:26). The Palestinian liturgy merely appends the words \u201cand rule over us, You alone.\u201d Now, the short benediction \u201cInstruct us\u201d (\u05d4\u05d1\u05d9\u05e0\u05e0\u05d5), reads: \u201cAnd regarding those who err in your way, may they judge according to your knowledge.\u201d Even if \u201cInstruct us\u201d is not a reflex of an earlier version of the benediction, it clearly represents an early understanding of the benediction. Historically speaking, \u201cthose who err in your way\u201d\u2014of whom it is hoped that in the future they will \u201cjudge according to your knowledge\u201d\u2014can only be the Sadducees, who refuse to follow the Oral Torah in rendering judgment. It stands to reason that this is the thrust of \u201cRestore our judges,\u201d which precedes Birkat ha-Minim. Clearly, a petitionary prayer for judgments to once again be rendered according to the Oral Torah lacks the vitriolic hostility toward the sages\u2019 opponents so evident in Birkat ha-Minim.<br \/>\nThe benediction following Birkat ha-Minim, \u201cThe Benediction of the Righteous,\u201d will be cited in its Palestinian form: \u201cMay your mercies stir for your righteous and your holy, and for the converts who put their trust in You. Give us and give them a good reward with those who do your will in the Land of Israel, a support and safe haven for the righteous.\u201d The advantage of this version is that its first half, that refers to the righteous and the holy, stands as an independent unit, unrelated to the second, which deals with converts\u2014very much in keeping with t. Berakhot 3.25. Nonetheless, this is clearly an abbreviated version, since it lacks the elders, who are mentioned explicitly in the Tosefta, and the scribes, who are mentioned in both the Ashkenazic and Sephardic liturgical traditions. The Ashkenazic liturgy employs the phrase \u201cthe remnant of their scribes,\u201d which appears already in Megillat Ta\u2019anit: \u201cOn the seventeenth (of Adar) the nations rose against the remnant of the scribes in the land of Chalcis in the house of Zabdi, and there was salvation,\u201d an event that occurred in the time of Alexander Jannaeus. The benediction of the righteous, then, makes mention of the institutions, or better, the groups, that make up the separatist group vis-\u00e0-vis the sages.<br \/>\nAll this suggests that \u201cRestore Our Judges,\u201d which precedes Birkat ha-Minim, was aimed against the erroneous legal teachings of the Sadducees, while the Benediction of the Righteous, which follows Birkat ha-Minim, sought to elevate the status of the Pharisees. As for the middle benediction, Birkat ha-Minim itself, we have already seen that it attacks a wide range of separatists. The material adduced suggests that it was once aimed against the Essenes, among others. The fact that three consecutive benedictions apparently refer to the three central groups within Second Temple Judaism\u2014the Sadducees, Essenes, and Pharisees\u2014is significant far beyond the purview of our present study. For it now becomes clear that, contrary to the view of some scholars, the tripartite division into schools employed time and again by Josephus in describing the Jewish world of his day, is not an artificial system imposed, as it were, to imbue Judaism with an added dimension of Greek spirituality. Indeed, this scholarly position was already refuted by the publication of Pesher Nahum from Qumran, which demonstrated that the Essenes too identified the same three groups: Essenes, Pharisees, and Sadducees. The discovery of the Qumran documents has demonstrated, then, that the division is not the result of Josephus\u2019 speculations, but rather anchored in the social reality of the day. If so, we may assume that the sages too understood the Jewish world to be divided into these three groups, and that their response to each found expression in the three benedictions of the Amidah. And if the tripartite division of Israel was self-evident, we must assume that the three benedictions\u2014that on this reading reflect this division\u2014were incorporated into the Amidah at the same time. I believe we are dealing with the late Hasmonean period, assuming, of course, that \u201cRestore Our Judges\u201d expresses the hope that the Sadducees repent the error of their ways.<br \/>\nAnother indication that the three benedictions were incorporated into the liturgy at the same time\u2014and, indirectly, that they refer to the three Second Temple \u201cschools\u201d\u2014is their location within the Amidah. They are found between the benedictions whose conclusions are \u201cWho Gathers the Dispersed of His People Israel\u201d and \u201cBuilder of Jerusalem,\u201d respectively. Not coincidentally, these two conclusions\u2014in reverse order\u2014constitute a verse from Psalms (147:2): \u201cThe Lord builds up Jerusalem; he gathers the outcasts of Israel.\u201d If we remove the three benedictions, the gap between the two parts of the verse disappears. I have argued elsewhere that the hope for the building of Jerusalem and for the ingathering of exiles becomes central to the Jewish world with the destruction of the First Temple, when Jerusalem is razed and the people are exiled, the majority not to return even until today. As it became less probable that both hopes will be realized in the present age, there grew the sentiment\u2014already in the Persian period\u2014that Jerusalem will be restored to its former glory and the exiles gathered in Israel, only in the End of Days.<br \/>\nIt should be noted that the yearning for a personal messiah (or messiahs) tended to grow stronger only later in the Second Temple period. There is no trace of this view in a number of eschatological texts written during this period. No wonder, then, that the Amidah once prayed for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the ingathering of exiles without mentioning the messiah. However, as the belief in the messiah\u2019s advent grew stronger, references to his person became frequent in Jewish liturgy, including the Amidah\u2014a process whose genesis is already evident in Tannaitic times. This tendency finds expression in one of two ways: either the figure of the messiah is incorporated into the benediction itself, and it concludes with the words \u201cthe God of David, builder of Jerusalem,\u201d or, a new benediction is added after the Benediction for Jerusalem, i.e., the one that opens \u201cthe shoot of David\u201d (\u05e6\u05de\u05d7 \u05d3\u05d5\u05d3). As the Tosefta says (t. Berakhot 3.25): \u201cOne may include \u2026 the benediction of David in that of Jerusalem. And if one said each as a blessing unto itself, he has fulfilled his legal obligation.\u201d<br \/>\nIn considering the benedictions that come before and after the three \u201cpolitical\u201d benedictions\u2014i.e., the benediction of the ingathering of exiles and of Jerusalem\u2014it should be emphasized that these are the only two benedictions in the Amidah that openly express Israel\u2019s hope for the End of Days. The other Amidah benedictions are bereft of eschatological significance, even though the yearning for redemption caused eschatological elements to be incorporated into other benedictions as well\u2014though this was a complex and variegated process that lies beyond the purview of the present analysis. One such change, that occurred at a relatively early stage, is evident in the second benediction, the Benediction of Mighty Deeds, or gevurot. It appears that God was at one time referred to as \u201cmaster of mighty deeds\u201d (\u05d1\u05e2\u05dc \u05d2\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea), while the resurrection of the dead was understood as saving one from a terrible disease or danger. Apparently, the mention of the resurrection in the benediction generated a new conclusion in which God is explicitly called \u201cwho resurrects the dead\u201d in an eschatological sense\u2014part of the Pharisee polemic against the Sadducees, who rejected the doctrine of resurrections. As for the Benediction of Redemption (\u05d1\u05e8\u05db\u05ea \u05d4\u05d2\u05d0\u05d5\u05dc\u05d4), its location indicates that it refers to a petition for aid in the case of personal distress, rather than for future redemption. Indeed, the version we possess today contains only one word, \u201credeem us quickly\u201d (\u05de\u05d4\u05e8\u05d4), with any eschatological meaning. Again we see that only the benedictions for ingathering of exiles and for the building of Jerusalem were eschatological (excluding \u201cthe Shoot of David,\u201d which was added at some later point).<br \/>\nShmuel Safrai\u2019s article on \u201cGathering in the Synagogues on Festivals, Sabbaths and Weekdays\u201d makes a substantive contribution to our understanding of the history of the Amidah. Safrai shows that synagogues served as places of gathering only on the Sabbath and holidays. On these occasions, the congregation prayed the Amidah with seven benedictions (as is customary to this day), i.e., the first three benedictions, the last three benedictions, and, in the middle, the benediction of the day. During all other times, only the twelve standard benedictions were prayed in the customary fashion, that is, in solitary prayer. After the destruction of the temple, in the generation of Yavne, daily prayer in congregations was instituted, and it was then that the eighteen benedictions were fixed as the weekday Amidah\u2014the six benedictions of the Sabbath and holidays, together with the twelve weekday benedictions. Safrai believes\u2014rightly, to my mind\u2014that pre-70 the weekday Amidah contained the benediction that opens \u201cYou grant mankind knowledge\u201d (\u05d7\u05d5\u05e0\u05df \u05dc\u05d0\u05d3\u05dd \u05d3\u05e2\u05ea \u05d0\u05ea\u05d4), through the conclusion \u201cBlessed are You Lord, who hears prayer.\u201d I think Safrai\u2019s approach is correct, and that powerful new arguments may be adduced in its favor. For example, it is undoubtedly true that the number of benedictions\u2014seven and twelve\u2014has its own internal logic, and that it stands to reason that the list of weekday benedictions once ended with the request that God hear one\u2019s prayers. A fascinating parallel is found in Hodayot 19.27\u201334, that includes three paragraphs, and opens: \u201cBlessed are you Lord [or: God]\u201d; the next benediction contains, inter alia, thanks to God for having \u201cgiven your servant the insight of knowledge to understand your wonders\u201d and hope for God\u2019s grace and forgiveness; the content of the third and final benediction parallels that of \u201cWho hears prayer.\u201d<br \/>\nSafrai\u2019s discovery is important to understanding the place of Birkat ha-Minim within the Amidah. If we accept his assumptions, during the Second Temple period, the weekday Amidah was a petitionary prayer consisting of requests that God grant one knowledge, cause him to repent, forgive him his sins, and save him from calamities. In addition, there were benedictions for God to cure ills and bless the year. Finally, there came a cluster of five benedictions concerning the Jewish people as a whole, the first and last of which express core eschatological hopes: that the exiles be gathered, and that Jerusalem be rebuilt. It is not surprising that the two petitions for Israel\u2019s eschatological redemption are located after a series of personal requests, and that the requests conclude with the hope that God hear the prayers just spoken. It is also clear that the only natural place to situate the three \u201cpolitical\u201d benedictions is between the two benedictions that refer to the Jewish people as a whole. Thus it happened that these three benedictions\u2014that I believe refer to the three main \u201cschools\u201d: Sadducees, Essenes, and Pharisees\u2014are found between the benediction for the ingathering of exiles and for the rebuilding of Jerusalem.<br \/>\nSince the discovery that Birkat ha-Minim was not established in Yavne in order to exclude the Christians from the Jewish people, scholarship on the topic has made significant strides. However, this progress has raised a series of unforeseen challenges. The attempt to overcome them has been fruitful, but as with other scholarly issues, there remain a number of open questions concerning Birkat ha-Minim, even as others have been satisfactorily answered. Thus, we have a better understanding of b. Megillah 17b: \u201cShimon ha-Pakuli arranged the eighteen benedictions in order before Rabban Gamaliel at Yavne.\u201d In light of the above analysis, this may refer to the arrangement of the weekday Amidah so as to combine the twelve benedictions that were customary at that time with the six benedictions of the Sabbath and holiday liturgy\u2014three prior and three subsequent\u2014since it was then that daily congregational prayer was established. It may be surmised that the Yavne leaders did not stop here, but rather established certain instructions regarding the language and the internal structure of the eighteen benedictions. Thus the question: what did Shmuel the Small contribute to the language and structure of Birkat ha-Minim? After all, the benediction appears to predate him by many years! Earlier we proposed the hypothesis that it was here joined with the benediction \u201cRestore our Judges,\u201d which precedes it, and \u201cOn the Righteous,\u201d which follows it. In light of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the words of the sages themselves, we further suggested that at the time it was aimed against the Essenes, though clearly its scope was not limited to the Essenes, as the later, secondary use was aimed against the Christians. Saul Lieberman has already established the early provenance of the blessing. He writes: \u201cThe benediction against the separatists existed a long time prior to Shmuel the Small, however he was the first who established it as a prayer aimed specifically against the minim, as they had begun to pose a threat to the people.\u201d<br \/>\nIt is not easy to accept the view that the explicit mention of the minim was instituted only at Yavne. At the outset of the present discussion we cited the ancient tradition that has been preserved at the end of chapter three of Seder \u02bfOlam, according to which \u201cthose who separate themselves from the path of the community, for example the minim, the informers, the hypocrites \u2026 will be locked in hell and they will be judged in it for all eternity, forevermore.\u201d We further saw that this tradition is reflected in additional sources, and that this was undoubtedly the original kernel of Birkat ha-Minim. We have already noted that those who separate themselves from the paths of the community, the group cited first in the list in Seder \u02bfOlam, are identical with the \u201cseparatists\u201d mentioned in t. Berakhot 3.25 as candidates for the special benediction in the Amidah. To be sure, the term perushim, \u2018separatists,\u2019 does not appear in the extant versions of Birkat ha-Minim, but three of the four types of sinners enumerated in Seder \u02bfOlam\u2014apostates, minim, and informants\u2014do. Furthermore, the minim constitute an almost organic part of the list in Seder \u02bfOlam, so it is clear that their citation in Birkat ha-Minim is justified. Finally, it is unlikely that the list of separatists in Seder \u02bfOlam was formed under the influence of Birkat ha-Minim. All this suggests that Shmuel the Small was probably not the first to mention the minim in the benediction devoted to them. That said, it is clear that Birkat ha-Minim introduces two distinct issues: those who separate themselves from the path of the community (a group that includes the minim), and the kingdom of evil. Thus we surmised that Birkat ha-Minim was formed through a synthesis of two benedictions\u2014one against those who separate from the community, and another against the evil kingdom, i.e., Rome. It was this synthesis that was affected, apparently, by Shmuel the Small. Support for this suggestion is found in the words of the Tosefta (3.25) that \u201cone may include the benediction of the minim in that of the separatists,\u201d or alternately, \u201cin that of the wicked.\u201d It is possible that the heavy burden of Roman rule generated, at one time, a special benediction against this evil government. Originally located beside Birkat ha-Minim, the two were joined into a single benediction after the destruction of the Temple. This is merely a hypothesis, but one supported by the double form of Birkat ha-Minim and the variant readings of the Tosefta.<\/p>\n<p>VIII. Conclusions<\/p>\n<p>We have traveled a long way in trying to arrive at the origins of Birkat ha-Minim. Along the way, we have had to employ various hypotheses, but these have worked to our advantage, as we have managed to uncover certain aspects of the religious sensibility of the Second Temple period, and to clarify a number of heretofore obscure issues regarding the history of the Amidah. The primary kernel of Birkat ha-Minim lies in the notion that while the God of Israel is a forgiving god, He will not absolve those who speak against Him or His glory\u2014neither in this world nor in the next. Despite the long and winding road traversed by this idea\u2014from its original kernel to the final form of Birkat ha-Minim\u2014the core notion that sinners who scorn God\u2019s glory \u201chave no hope\u201d remains constant. This same notion finds expression in the very end of chapter three of Seder \u02bfOlam: \u201c[T]hose who separate themselves from the path of the community, for example the minim, the informers, the hypocrites and the heretics \u2026 will be locked in hell and they will be judged in it for all eternity, forevermore.\u2026 On account of what? That they lifted their hands against the zevul.\u201d Incidentally, other than the \u2018hypocrites,\u2019 the other three types of sinner are cited in Birkat ha-Minim.<br \/>\nBoth Seder \u02bfOlam and Birkat ha-Minim present a single type of sinner who scorns God\u2019s glory: these are now defined as those who \u201cseparate themselves from the path of the community\u201d and, in so doing, harm the Jewish people as a whole. True, the notion that these sinners are irredeemable remains, but the center of gravity has shifted from religious or theological definition of their transgression, to a \u201cpolitical\u201d or social one. As the two passages from the Dead Sea Scrolls suggest, this shift toward a more national definition likely occurred during the Hasmonean reign.<br \/>\nAs noted, the sinners enumerated in Seder \u02bfOlam are characterized as having separated themselves from the path of the community. Were we to express this concept in a single word it would have to be perushim, \u2018separatists,\u2019 a word that also refers to the Pharisees. Indeed, t. Berakhot preserves a benediction aimed explicitly at these perushim. We may assume, then, the Birkat ha-Minim was once called Birkat ha-Perushim, \u2018the benediction against the separatists,\u2019 and that it included this term. However, even though this term elegantly epitomizes the list of separatists, it disappeared over time for reasons that are evident: for one thing, \u2018Pharisees\u2019 came to be associated with the Jewish sages themselves.<br \/>\nUnlike these \u2018Pharisee\u2019 sages, who detested those who sought to divorce themselves from the Jewish people as a whole, the Essene sectarians at Qumran characterized themselves as having removed themselves from \u201cthe path of this people\u201d (a statement based on Isaiah 8:11), and were even willing to state that \u201cwe have separated ourselves from the majority of the people\u201d! We may assume, then, that the benediction against the perushim-minim was once aimed against the separatist Essene sect, particularly as this hypothesis finds support from other quarters. It is in this context that we argued that the benediction preceding Birkat ha-Minim refers to the Sadducees, while the subsequent benediction undoubtedly refers to the sages. On this reading, the three benedictions mirror the tripartite division of the Jewish people into Sadducees, Essenes, and Pharisees. As for Birkat ha-Minim itself, we have tried to show that it is made up of two originally independent benedictions, one aimed at the perushim (and the minim), and the benediction against the wicked, that prays for the speedy uprooting of the wicked kingdom.<br \/>\nThe final twist in the development of Birkat ha-Minim occurred after the destruction of the Second Temple. The historical evidence indicates that during the second temple the Jewish congregations came to understand Birkat ha-Minim as aimed against the Christians. Ultimately, at some point no later than the fourth century, the word \u2018Christians\u2019 was incorporated into the text of the benediction\u2014though this occurred only in the Palestinian liturgy.<br \/>\nI have presented an exhaustive and extensive survey, but it could not be otherwise given the subject at hand. It was necessary to trace the development of a single Jewish benediction over the course of many generations of growth and development in Jewish religious thought\u2014undoubtedly one of the most important religious worldviews. Ancient Jewish thought was by no means impoverished or simplistic, rather sophisticated and sensitive. The history of Birkat ha-Minim is but one of many examples of the intellectual richness of Jewish religious thought of the time.<\/p>\n<p>Note: The Qumran community considered it a religious obligation to stray from the way of the Jewish people as a whole, a people from whom they knowingly separated themselves. This view helps explain CD 20.22\u201324: \u201c\u2026 the house of division (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05e4\u05dc\u05d2) who left the holy city and leaned on God in the age of Israel\u2019s unfaithfulness; be defiled the temple and turned back to the path of the people in some things.\u201d Clearly, the faction who broke with the sect accepted some of the legal teachings of mainstream Judaism. Pesher Nahum also refers to this faction when it tells of the tragic end of \u201cthe house of division (\u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05e4\u05dc\u05d2), who consorted with Manasseh\u201d (4.1\u20133), that is, of those who joined with the Sadducees. The entire matter requires additional investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Appendix: Rabbi Yehoshua and Birkat ha-Minim<\/p>\n<p>Shmuel Safrai has called my attention to a formula in chapter four of Mishnah Berakhot 4.4 (following MS Kaufmann): \u201cHe that journeys in a place of danger should pray a short prayer, saying \u2018Save, O Lord, your people, Israel, but for those separating from the community (\u05e4\u05e8\u05e9\u05ea \u05e2\u05d9\u05d1\u05d5\u05e8)\u2014let their needs not come before you. Blessed are you, Lord, who hears prayer.\u201d<br \/>\nNumerous criteria suggest that the reading of MS Kaufmann is the most original, even though it too appears to have been altered over time. It suggests that Rabbi Yehoshua\u2019s short prayer takes the place of the eighteen benedictions. One is to pray for the redemption of the Jewish people, with the exception of those who divorce themselves from the people as a whole; one prays that the wishes of all Israel be fulfilled, but not of the separatists. In short, this is an allusion to Birkat ha-Minim, since those who separate themselves from the path of the community are, in fact, the minim.<br \/>\nThis is undoubtedly the meaning of the second part of Rabbi Yehoshua\u2019s short prayer. We have here the earliest definite allusion to Birkat ha-Minim, and the content of the prayer supports our view in the above article. Here is a synoptic comparison of Rabbi Yehoshua\u2019s benediction and Birkat ha-Minim:<\/p>\n<p>Rabbi Yehoshua<br \/>\nBirkat ha-Minim<br \/>\nThose separating from the community from the path of the community<br \/>\nThose who separate themselves<br \/>\nLet their needs not come before you<br \/>\nMay they have no hope.<\/p>\n<p>10.      The \u2018Book of the Mysteries\u2019 and the High Holy Days Liturgy<\/p>\n<p>To Prof. Ezra Fleischer<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>The writings of the Qumran community\u2014which has been identified, rightly to my mind, with the Essene sect\u2014include a composition that was apparently among the most important and the most beautiful of works of the Hebrew literature of the Second Temple period. Unfortunately, only a few fragments survive, most of them quite small, though there is one larger fragment that will be discussed in some detail. The composition has been dubbed \u2018The Book of the Mysteries\u2019 by scholars. The scroll was written by a member of the Qumran community, or by someone who belonged to the religious movement from which Qumran emerged. It is a sectarian work that contains a unique blend of apocalyptic and eschatological visions (quite common in the Dead Sea Scrolls), alongside elements from the Wisdom literature. One example is the fragment that speaks of something that is purchased \u201cwithout wealth, and will be sold without them paying him\u201d (1QMyst 2.6)\u2014a clear reference to morality. Another fragment exhorts its readers \u201cHear you kings of the nations \u2026 with all the rulers of the earth.\u201d To be sure, the text alludes to Psalm 2:10 (\u201cNow therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth\u201d), but there is a closer connection to chapter six of the Wisdom of Solomon: \u201cHear then, you kings, and understand; take note, lords of the far corners of the earth.\u201d Our analysis of the extant fragment of the Book of Mysteries will further demonstrate the ties between this text and Second Temple Wisdom literature.<br \/>\nIt should be noted that the same admixture of views characteristic of the Dead Sea community\u2014that were, no doubt, shared by wider circles as well\u2014with Wisdom motifs, is found in the Wisdom of Solomon as well. I have already discussed one important parallel between these works elsewhere, and there is a fascinating affinity between the eschatological-apocalyptic description in Wisdom of Solomon and the parallel discussion in the Qumran Hodayot. The stylistic and substantive affinity is so great, that we may hypothesize that the author of Wisdom of Solomon knowingly imitated the style of the Hodayot, or perhaps of a similar sectarian composition. In discussing these parallels it is important to remember that wisdom literature was not a uniquely Hebrew genre, and that there are Greek wisdom texts as well, especially since Wisdom of Solomon (which was composed in Greek) is based on Greek philosophical thought. Are there traces of Greek philosophy in the Book of Mysteries from Qumran? As the following discussion suggests, the answer to this question is most likely positive, providing us with a singular testimony to the possibility of Greek philosophical influence on the Dead Sea sect. I do not plan on concealing this information from the readers, though the main thrust of this study is to map out the connection between the Book of Mysteries and a passage from the Rosh ha-Shanah Amidah liturgy.<br \/>\nLet us begin by citing the Qumran passage, and then examine its meaning as well as its significance for the history of pre-70 Jewish literature and thought.<\/p>\n<p>2.      mysteries of sin<br \/>\n3.      \u2026 all their wisdom. And they do not know the mystery of future events, nor understand ancient matters. And they do not<br \/>\n4.      know what is going to happen to them; and they will not save their souls from the mystery of existence.<br \/>\n5.      And this will be for you the sign that this is going to happen. When all that is born of sin is locked up, evil will disappear before justice as darkness disappears before<br \/>\n6.      light. As smoke vanishes, and no longer exists, so will evil vanish forever. And justice will be revealed like the sun which regulates<br \/>\n7.      the world. And all those who support the mysteries of sin will no longer exist. And knowledge will pervade the world, and there will never be folly there.<br \/>\n8.      This word will undoubtedly happen, the prediction is truthful. And by this he will show you that [his word] will not return [unfulfilled]: Do not all<br \/>\n9.      nations loathe sin? And yet, they all walk about under its influence. Does not praise of truth come from the mouth of all nations?<br \/>\n10.      And yet, is there perhaps one lip or one tongue which persists with it? What people would wish to be oppressed by another more powerful than itself? Who<br \/>\n11.      would wish to be sinfully looted of its wealth? And yet, which is the people not to oppress its neighbor? Where is the people which has not<br \/>\n12.      looted another of its wealth?\u2026 and there exists \u2026<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>This is a very interesting passage, but unfortunately we can only hypothesize as to the broader context in which these verses originally appeared. What is clear is that up to line 5 the author attacks the sinners who have no understanding, who do not know the mystery of future events nor the meaning of the past. Since they do not know their future fate, they are unable to save themselves from the calamities that will surely come. In lines 5\u20137 the author addresses his readers, informing them of the future disappearance of all evil. This statement is preceded by a headline of sorts: \u201cAnd this will be for you the sign that this is going to happen,\u201d and at the conclusion of this lyrical description he refers to it as a \u201cprediction\u201d (\u05de\u05e9\u05d0) (line 8). Does this mean that the description was lifted from another source, or is the \u201cprediction\u201d also part of the author\u2019s composition? Though the question remains open, even if we were to discover that the roots of this prophetic passage reach back to the ancient past, it is likely that its present form was fixed by the author of the Book of Mysteries.<br \/>\nFollowing the prediction\u2014from line 8 and following\u2014there is, essentially, a theoretical-philosophical discourse, whose conclusion is unfortunately lost. Its purpose is to persuade the reader that \u201cthis word will undoubtedly happen, the prediction is truthful.\u201d The author then goes on to state: \u201cAnd by this he will show you that [his word] will not return [unfulfilled],\u201d referring to the above prophecy concerning the disappearance of all evil from the world. The content of the prediction may appear questionable to many readers: can one really say that \u201cevil will vanish forever \u2026 knowledge will pervade the world, and there will never be folly there\u201d? Will there ever arise a humanity untainted by sin and evil? Against those who would argue that the seeds of evil are to be found within human nature itself, our author responds that even today human nature is fundamentally good, even though man commits many evils. Here is the lesson of human history:<\/p>\n<p>Do not all nations loathe sin? And yet, they all walk about under its influence. Does not praise of truth come from the mouth of all nations? And yet, is there perhaps one lip or one tongue which persists with it? What people would wish to be oppressed by another more powerful than itself? Who would wish to be sinfully looted of its wealth? And yet, which is the people not to oppress its neighbor? Where is the people which has not looted another of its wealth?<\/p>\n<p>It is worth noting that this passage thrice contrasts what is and what ought be: each of the first two lines contains this contrast, while the third and fourth lines oppose each other in this manner\u2014no nation wants another nation, stronger than it, to wickedly loot it, yet all nations loot each other. Both the content and the literary quality of this philosophic passage are unusual, and one can only lament that the remaining text did not survive.<br \/>\nIn order to grasp the meaning of this passage within the broader context of the sect\u2019s worldview, we must first examine two sources that express similar philosophical ideas, both of which occur in the Pauline letters and provide a similar explanation for the tension between what is and what ought to be. In his Epistle to the Romans, Paul writes:<\/p>\n<p>I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now, if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. But in fact it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. (7:15\u201317).<\/p>\n<p>According to Paul, then, the spirit that resides within man pushes him to desire the good, but the sin in his flesh prevents him from pursuing the good and ultimately he does that which he hates. This view informs Paul\u2019s instruction to his followers (Galatians 5:16\u201317): \u201cLive by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want.\u201d<br \/>\nAccording to these passages, Paul argues that the tension between man\u2019s good intention and his evil deeds lies in the carnal aspect of man that enslaves him to sin. The dichotomy between the flesh and the spirit\u2014an important part of the anthropology of Paul and the Hodayot alike\u2014is nowhere to be found in the Qumran Book of Mysteries: here man is assumed not to be fundamentally evil, for when \u201cevil [will] vanish forever\u201d there will exist a humanity freed of sin and injustice. As we will see, this perspective distinguishes the Book of Mysteries from the Hodayot, and aligns it with the eschatological vision of the Manual of Discipline (4.18\u201323) in which the spirit of holiness will purify mankind in the end of days.<br \/>\nBut first we must examine the philosophical passage. We have established that the passage serves as a proof of sorts for the correctness of the eschatological prediction that precedes it (lines 5\u20137), and that describes the disappearance of evil in the end of days: \u201cThis word will undoubtedly happen, and prediction is truthful.\u201d But the central concept in this passage\u2014and in Paul\u2019s teachings, cited above\u2014did not emerge from the hamartology and the anthropology of the Essenes, but rather is an independent concept taken from Greek philosophy. From a psychological perspective, the state in which a person hates injustice but does it nonetheless, belongs to the category of \u2018ambivalence,\u2019 a term that here refers to conflicting tendencies or aspirations. The words of the Book of Mysteries, \u201cDo not all nations loathe sin? And yet, they all walk under its influence\u201d have a precise parallel in Medea\u2019s words in Ovid\u2019s Metamorphoses: \u201cI see the better course and approve, but follow its defeat.\u201d Nor is this a purely psychological matter, rather it concerns the moral-theoretical aspect as well. It is further worth noting the philosophical dimension of Xenophon\u2019s discussion in On the Education of Cyrus, where he explains man\u2019s will to good and tendency to evil as rooted in the contrast between man\u2019s good soul and his evil soul. Xenophon suggests that this view is typical of the sophists\u2014and there is reason to think this is so.<br \/>\nIndeed, man\u2019s internal struggle between good intentions and evil deeds is one of the core issues of ancient Greek philosophy. Already Socrates raised the question of whether a man who knows the good can act in contrast to his right knowledge. According to Aristotle, Socrates answered this question in the negative\u2014a man who possesses right judgment will never live a wanton life. Aristotle himself rejected this position, arguing that it contradicts everyday experience. Plato too broke with Socrates on this point. The most striking parallel to the philosophical position of the Book of Mysteries is found in the hymn to Zeus composed by Cleanthes, the disciple and heir of Zeno, the founder of Stoicism (died 231\/232 B.C.E.). According to this hymn, miserable are those who do not live according to reason, for even though they yearn to reach the good, they neither know nor obey the divine law. Were they to obey this law, they would live a happy life\u2014yet they pursue that which is opposed to the good.<br \/>\nThe similarity between the theoretical position of the Qumran document, and that of the Greek philosopher, is readily apparent. Moreover, there is another trait that ties the document to Greek thought: the contrast between will and action occurs in an explicitly political context. It is not the behavior of the individual that is under discussion, but the behavior of \u201call nations.\u201d This too accords with the Greek model, according to which a concord of nations is one of the key proofs of the correctness of a philosophical position. A fascinating example of this approach is found in the speech given by the Greek philosopher Carneades in Rome in 155 B.C.E., in which he attacks the regnant ethical position\u2014and, indeed, the entire world view\u2014of the Stoa. The content of this speech is recorded by Cicero in book three of De Republica. Carneades argued that there is no reason to think that there is one natural moral law that is common to mankind. Nations do not pursue justice, but rather their own self-interest. After citing this view, Cicero introduces an interlocutor who argues against it, suggesting that there is one eternal natural law, namely right reason. This law is immutable and shared by all, drawing us nearer to desirable action, and distancing us from error. The righteous are those who obey it, while the wicked cast off its yoke. It applies to all nations and holds forever, for its roots are in God. Whoever does not obey this law flees from himself, for he disparages human nature itself, and for this he will suffer harsh punishment.<br \/>\nA close examination of the rebuttal to Carneades reveals that both its content and its terminology mark it as distinctly Stoic. And there is reason to believe that this is also the intellectual background to the philosophic passage in the Book of Mysteries. For the Stoics, man is fundamentally good, but nonetheless does evil. Moreover, drawing on the behavior of nations as proof of this statement is itself very much a part of Stoic thought. Thus the conclusion that the doctrine of the Jewish Essene scroll reflects the influence of Greek thought on the Jewish intellectual world of the time, a phenomenon hereto unattested in Qumran literature. This in addition to the timeless significance of this philosophical passage, for even in our own day all the nations loathe sin\u2014but \u201cthey all walk about under its influence.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>Stoic ethics suggest that the divine natural law causes man to desire the good, but his own folly leads him to sin. This appears to be the fundamental view of the Jewish author of the Book of Mysteries. However, there is a marked difference between the two regarding the source of this human tendency to sin: while the Stoa explains this tendency as rooted in mankind\u2019s departure from the reason that governs the world, the sectarian author of 1QMysteries, who apparently belonged to the dualistic faction of Judaism, was convinced that \u201call that is born of sin\u201d stems from supernatural forces of evil. These forces currently wield power within our world, but will not do so forever:<\/p>\n<p>God, in the mysteries of his knowledge and in the wisdom of his glory, has determined an end to the existence of injustice and on the appointed time of the visitation he will obliterate it forever. Then truth shall rise up forever in the world, for it has been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for the judgment decided. Then God will refine, with his truth, all man\u2019s deeds, and will purify for himself the structure of man, ripping out all spirit of injustice from the innermost part of his flesh, and cleansing him with the spirit of holiness from every wicked deed. He will sprinkle over him the spirit of truth like lustral water (in order to cleanse him) from all the abhorrences of deceit and (from) the defilement of the unclean spirit [\u2026] There will be no more injustice and all the deeds of trickery will be a dishonor. (1QS 4.18\u201323)<\/p>\n<p>We see, then, that the Qumran community held that not only the evildoers, but evil itself will ultimately be destroyed, and the spirit of holiness will purify mankind both in the spirit and in the flesh \u201cfrom every wicked deed.\u201d To be sure, in the present time \u201cby the Angel of Darkness are the corruption of all the sons of justice, and all their sins, their iniquities, their guilts and their offensive deeds are under his dominion in compliance with the mysteries of God, until his end \u2026 and all the spirits of his lot cause the sons of light to fall\u201d (1QS 3.20\u201324), but in future days man will be freed of the power of injustice, and the tension between his will to good and his evil action will dissipate. But even given this difference in the explanation of the origins of evil, the author of the Book of Mysteries reached similar conclusions to those of the Stoa, and thus was able to include in his composition a passage that draws on Stoic philosophy.<br \/>\nOur findings thus far explain why the philosophical passage in 1QMysteries serves to justify the eschatological prediction that precedes the passage (lines 5\u20137), and discusses the destruction of evil. The content of the prediction parallels the teaching of the Manual of Discipline cited above (4.18\u201323) concerning the dissipation of injustice, and provides striking details absent from that passage. Here, once again, is the language of the prediction:<\/p>\n<p>When all that is born of sin is locked up, evil will disappear before justice as darkness disappears before light. As smoke vanishes, and no longer exists, so will evil vanish forever. And justice will be revealed like the sun which regulates the world. And all those who support the mysteries of sin will no longer exist. And knowledge will pervade the world, and there will never be folly there.<\/p>\n<p>This is clearly an eschatological vision of redemption, quite typical in Second Temple literature, and the motifs it employs have important parallels in other apocalyptic writings. The dualism evident in the passage is also typical of Jewish apocalyptic visions, though the concatenation of fixed terms marking the dichotomy between good and evil is more characteristic of Qumran literature: evil\u2014justice, darkness\u2014light, knowledge\u2014folly.<br \/>\nOne of these contrasting pairs is of particular importance to the present discussion. As we saw above, the Qumran community believed that God, \u201cin the mysteries of his knowledge and in the wisdom of his glory, has determined an end to the existence of injustice and on the appointed time of the visitation he will obliterate it forever\u201d (1QS 4.18\u201319). The \u201cmysteries of his knowledge\u201d is but one of the formulas used to describe the \u201cmysteries of God\u201d that are active throughout the world. But before evil can be destroyed completely in the days of the government of Belial, a counterforce must be overcome, namely, the \u201cmysteries of enmity\u201d of Belial (1QM 14.9). In other words, there are \u201cmysteries of sin\u201d that oppose the \u201cmysteries of God.\u201d This particular term is distributed quite widely in the sect\u2019s writings. It is found in Aramaic (\u05e8\u05d6 \u05e8\u05e9\u05e2\u05d0) in the Genesis Apocryphon (1.2), in a small fragment of the Hodayot (1QHa 24[top].5), as well as in the main body of the Hodayot (8.36), where we find that the \u201cmysteries of sin \u2026 have altered the deeds of God.\u201d The nefarious activity of the mysteries of sin will come to an end when God \u201cwill refine, with his truth, all man\u2019s deeds\u201d (1QS 4.20).<br \/>\nThe phrase \u201cmysteries of sin\u201d is found twice in the Book of Mysteries. The second occurrence states that when evil is destroyed, \u201call those who support the mysteries of sin will no longer exist.\u201d This statement can be explained in light of the apocalyptic passage in 2 Thessalonians 2:3\u201312, which discusses the ultimate defeat of the antichrist, and which contains the phrase \u201cmystery of sin\u201d itself (2:7\u201310). In this epistle, Paul writes of the end of \u201cthose who support the mysteries of sin\u201d\u2014as they are called in the Book of Mysteries\u2014as follows: The appearance of the antichrist will come \u201cin the working of Satan, who uses \u2026 every kind of wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sent them a powerful delusion, leading them to believe what is false, so that all who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned\u201d (9\u201312). The antichrist \u201cmay be revealed when his time comes; for the mystery of sin is already at work\u201d (6\u20137). The Greek text clearly indicates that, as in the Book of Mysteries, the actions of the mysteries of sin are nothing less than the actions of the devil. Clearly, then, both the character and the ultimate downfall of those who support the mysteries of sin in the Book of Mysteries, are strikingly similar to the apocalyptic doctrine in 2 Thessalonians regarding \u201call who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.\u201d<br \/>\nAs noted, the Pauline epistle holds that the activity of the mystery of sin will bring about an outburst of absolute evil in the end of days, which will then be utterly destroyed. The ultimate eradication of evil from the world is described in the visionary passage in 1QMysteries (lines 5\u20137), which states that evil will disappear after \u201call that is born of sin is locked up.\u201d For by locking up \u201call that is born of sin\u201d evil will no longer have a path into our world, and only then will the world and its inhabitants be purified \u201cof the unclean spirit\u201d (see 1QS 4.18\u201323). Does the phrase \u201call that is born of sin\u201d reflect some sort of sectarian mythical geography? This would indeed appear to be the case. The Manual of Discipline states that \u201cfrom the spring of light stem the generations of truth, and from the source of darkness the generations of deceit (\u05ea\u05d5\u05dc\u05d3\u05d5\u05ea \u05d4\u05e2\u05d5\u05dc)\u201d (3.19). In other words, the sect holds that truth is born \u201cfrom the spring of light,\u201d while deceit springs from \u201cthe source of darkness.\u201d The formula \u201call that is born of sin\u201d is similarly derived from the language of parturition, and presumably in the mythical geography of the sect, those \u201cborn of sin\u201d emerge from \u201cthe source of darkness,\u201d from which, again, comes deceit. We will see below that \u201call that is born of sin\u201d most likely emerge from Sheol.<br \/>\nWe have already seen that the apocalyptic vision of redemption in the Qumran Book of Mysteries complements the eschatological processes described in Manual of Discipline 4.18\u201323. However, the mythical force of the phrase \u201call that is born of sin\u201d becomes clearer through an examination of one of the Hodayot (11.5\u201318), which is rightly called \u2018birth pangs of the Messiah.\u2019 Notwithstanding the various difficulties in this text, there is no doubt that the author alludes to the birth pangs and birth of the messiah. The author describes the birth of the savior and the birth pangs involved in the process, and contrasts it to a cosmic process that results in the eruption of evil into the world. The raging attack of evil in the end of days fits well with the general pattern of eschatological and apocalyptic descriptions, and we have already seen that according to chapter two of 2 Thessalonians evil is about to attack, for the mysteries of sin\u2014now familiar to us from the Book of Mysteries\u2014have already begun their activity. Our hymn describes a parallel process, involving the birth pangs and birth of the messiah, on the one hand, and the cosmic eruption of evil, on the other, an eruption that is itself described as a birthing process: \u201cIn the woman expectant with him rush all the contraction and the racking pain at their birth; terror (seizes) those expectant with them, and at his birth all the labor-pains come suddenly, in the \u2018crucible\u2019 of the pregnant woman. And she who is pregnant with a serpent is with a racking pang; and the breakers of the pit result in all deeds of terror\u201d (1QHa 11.10\u201312). This terrible process and its ultimate conclusion are depicted at the end of the Hymn: \u201cand the gates of Sheol open for all the deeds of the serpent. And the doors of the pit close upon the one expectant with injustice, and everlasting bolts upon all the spirits of the serpent\u201d (11.17\u201318). If so, the matrices through which evil bursts into the world are mentioned twice in this Hymn. It stands to reason that these matrices emerge from Sheol at the place referred to in the Manual of Discipline 3.19 as \u201cthe source of darkness.\u201d In the end of days, after the great eruption of evil, \u201cthe doors of the pit close upon the one expectant with injustice, and everlasting bolts upon all the spirits of the serpent\u201d (1QHa 11.18). As for what occurs \u201cwhen all that is born of sin is locked up,\u201d this is described in lines 5\u20137 of the Book of Mysteries, namely, the absolute exorcism of evil from the world\u2014that is reflected in the Amidah of the Rosh ha-Shanah liturgy. However, it was necessary to discuss 1QMysteries in its entirety in order to discuss the full import of the connection between the Qumran passage and the liturgy that is still used in synagogues to this day.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>When I decided to dedicate this study to the path-breaking scholarship of Prof. Ezra Fleischer, his book on Palestinian liturgy had not yet been published. In light of his findings, a revolution has occurred in our understanding of the development of the passages \u201cWe pray, then, that you place your reverence \u2026\u201d (\u05ea\u05df \u05e4\u05d7\u05d3\u05da \u05d5\u05d1\u05db\u05df) that are today recited by all the Jewish communities on Rosh ha-Shanah in the third benediction of the Amidah. Prior to Fleischer\u2019s work, it was generally held that these passages were remnants of the \u201cKingship verses\u201d (\u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05d5\u05d9\u05d5\u05ea) according to the view of Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri, namely, that the \u201cKingship verses\u201d should be appended to the third benediction that deals with the sanctification of God\u2019s name, i.e., martyrdom. As against this view, Rabbi Aqiva held (and his view was accepted in practice) that one should append the \u201cKingship verses\u201d to the fourth benediction. \u201cScholars concluded that the \u2018Kingship verses\u2019 remained in the third blessing, a relic from the time that Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri\u2019s position was accepted. However, the argument goes, the \u201cKingship verses\u201d that came after these passages were omitted so as not to form a redundancy with what had already been fixed in the benediction of the sanctity of the day.\u201d Since these very paragraphs include a passage that undoubtedly exhibits a close literary connection with 1QMysteries, we can build on our earlier conclusions in light of Fleischer\u2019s new book.<br \/>\nThe Palestinian Geniza material leads Fleischer to the conclusion that \u201cthere is almost no possibility but to state that the passages in question [i.e. \u2018We pray, then, that you place your reverence \u2026\u2019] were not part of the standard Palestinian liturgy in the Geniza period, neither in the prayer of individual nor in that of the congregation.\u201d If so, Fleischer concludes, the hypothesis that \u201cWe pray, then, that you place your reverence \u2026\u201d was originally intended as a preface to the \u201cKingship verses,\u201d though elegant, is something of a reach, as it requires that we radically push back the dating of the redaction of this section. Today there can be no doubt that these passages belong to the Babylonian custom, and that from Babylon they spread to the liturgies of other Jewish congregations. In that case, asks Fleischer, were these passages composed in Babylon? He responds that there is no reason to deny this possibility, and concludes the discussion as follows: \u201cIt is certainly possible that the \u2018We pray, then, that you place your reverence \u2026\u2019 passages are indeed of Babylonian origin. However, it is also possible that the Babylonian sages adapted to their own needs earlier liturgical texts originally intended for other purposes\u2014indeed, perhaps the Palestinian preface to the \u2018Kingship verses\u2019 according to the ruling of Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri. This issue is of no real importance, and moreover cannot be decided.\u201d<br \/>\nThis is undoubtedly true: there is no way to decide the matter with absolute certitude. However, the extant remains of the Qumran Book of Mysteries strongly suggest that \u201cWe pray, then, that you place your reverence \u2026\u201d is of Palestinian origins. Here are the opening lines of the relevant part of the High Holy Days Amidah:<\/p>\n<p>Then the righteous will see and rejoice, while the upright exult,<br \/>\nand virtuous sing joyously<br \/>\nAnd injustice shall shut its mouth<br \/>\nAnd all evil shall dissipate like smoke<br \/>\nFor you shall pass the government of evil from the earth<br \/>\nAnd you alone will rule over all your creatures [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>To fully understand the meaning of this passage it is necessary to examine the biblical passages that underlie it. The language of the benediction, \u201cAnd injustice shall shut its mouth,\u201d is based on Job 5:16: \u201cAnd injustice shuts its mouth,\u201d but the opening lines allude to Psalm 107:42: \u201cThe upright see it and rejoice; and all injustice shuts its mouth.\u201d<br \/>\nBut what is the precise nature of the evil that will dissipate like smoke? Did the author of the benediction mean the end of the reign of the fourth wicked kingdom? This reading certainly suits the general spirit of the \u201cKingship verses\u201d and the meaning of the Rosh ha-Shanah holiday itself. For already the ancients understood the phrase \u2018wicked kingdom\u2019 as a reference to Rome, as evidenced by the fact that various liturgical traditions (Geniza texts, as well as the prayer books of Aleppo, Persia, and\u2014via Maimonides\u2014Yemen) add \u201cand the rejoicing kingdom will be speedily uprooted\u201d (\u05ea\u05e2\u05e7\u05e8 \u05d5\u05de\u05dc\u05db\u05d5\u05ea \u05d4\u05e2\u05dc\u05d9\u05d6\u05d4 \u05d1\u05de\u05d4\u05e8\u05d4) immediately following \u201cfor you shall pass the government of evil from the earth\u201d\u2014where \u201crejoicing kingdom\u201d is a reference to the Roman Empire. This is also the interpretation offered in the prayer book of the Hasidei Ashkenaz: \u201cInjustice shall shut its mouth: that is, the wicked kingdom that is full of injustice will clench shut its mouth, and there will be no speech against Israel \u2026 \u2018government of evil\u2019 refers to this wicked kingdom \u2026 the Roman Empire.\u201d The Vitry prayer book offers the same interpretation (p. 367): \u201c&nbsp;\u2018Injustice,\u2019 that is, the wicked kingdom that is injustice throughout [\u2026] that is, you will pass from this world the government of evil, the wicked kingdom.\u201d And it is indeed very easy to interpret the formula \u2018government of evil\u2019 as referring to the wicked kingdom, since \u2018kingdom of evil\u2019 referred to the Roman Empire as far back as the time that Birkat ha-Minim was composed. However, the connection between \u2018kingdom of evil\u2019 and the wicked kingdom existed even prior to Birkat ha-Minim. Already in the words of Isaiah (50:21\u201322) the Babylonian Empire is called \u2018evil\u2019, and Ben Sira will later express the wish (35:22\u201323) that \u201cGod indeed will not delay and like a warrior will not be still; Till he breaks the backs of the merciless and wreaks vengeance upon the nations; Till he destroys the scepter of the wicked and breaks off short the staff of the sinner.\u201d But even though \u2018kingdom of evil\u2019 became a political formula par excellence\u2014at least from the time of Birkat ha-Minim\u2014it does not follow that the petition to destroy the \u2018government of evil\u2019 in the High Holy Days Amidah service referred to the fourth kingdom in the end of days. To the contrary, if we examine the entire passage carefully we will find that it is far more probable that the kingdom that is to be destroyed is understood in cosmic-ethical terms, rather than a political entity. Just as it will become possible to check the spread of injustice, so too wickedness will disappear altogether, thus marking the end of the dominion of evil in the world. Then God alone will be king over all creation. This interpretation can be decisively established by comparing our liturgical passage with the eschatological section of the Qumran Book of Mysteries. As the following demonstrates, even the order of topics is identical:<\/p>\n<p>1Qmysteries<br \/>\nPrayer<br \/>\nWhen all that is born of sin is locked up<br \/>\nAnd injustice shall shut its mouth<br \/>\nAs smoke vanishes, and no longer exists, so will evil vanish forever<br \/>\nAnd all evil shall dissipate like smoke<br \/>\nAnd all those who support the mysteries of sin will no longer exist of evil<br \/>\nFor you shall pass the government from the earth<\/p>\n<p>It is noteworthy that the Qumran document serves to elucidate the meaning of the liturgy and not vice versa. Thus, for example, the parallels with the Qumran material lead us to the conclusion that the phrase \u2018government of evil\u2019 does not refer to the Roman Empire, but rather to the dominion of evil in the world. Similarly, without the scrolls it would be difficult to divine the meaning of \u2018And injustice shall shut its mouth\u2019\u2014a phrase that contains elements taken from Job and Psalms, as discussed above. The parallel, however, indicates that the author of the prayer understood the biblical phrase as alluding to injustice closing its mouth, thus preventing further evil from bursting into the world; consequently, evil itself will dissipate like smoke. We are thus forced to admit that there was indeed a literary connection between the liturgical passage and the Qumran Book of Mysteries. There is, of course, one major difference between the texts: the radical dualism and the concomitant terminology, so regular in the Qumran writings, are wholly absent from the prayer, which makes no mention of the divisions \u2018light-darkness,\u2019 \u2018wicked-righteous,\u2019 \u2018knowledge-folly.\u2019<br \/>\nDoes this difference mean that it was the prayer that influenced the formation of the parallel passage in the Book of Mysteries? Unfortunately, this hypothesis is quite improbable, since it has just been conclusively demonstrated that, as far as its content is concerned, the Rosh ha-Shanah liturgy is a perfect fit with the religious worldview of Qumran. This is not the case, however, with the religious worldview of the sages, in which the liturgical passage fits much less well. Both the liturgical passage and the Book of Mysteries express a distinct segment of the Qumran sect\u2019s ideology, complementing the material in Manual of Discipline 4.18\u201323. That is, we have before us an explanation of what will occur in the desired end of days, namely, the division of the world into the forces of righteousness and injustice, for \u201cGod, in the mysteries of his knowledge and in the wisdom of his glory, has determined an end to the existence of injustice and on the appointed time of the visitation he will obliterate it forever\u201d (1QS 4.18\u201319). It is hard to find in the teachings of the sages any parallel to the highly distilled theological-metaphysical description of the eschatological banishment of evil from the world described in both 1Qmysteries and the Rosh ha-Shanah liturgy. The most appropriate time to include this theological position into the general Jewish liturgy is the High Holy Days, a time of sublime spirituality, in which the soul seeks out answers regarding the ultimate purpose of the good and evil found in man and in the world.<br \/>\nThe determination that Essene thought influenced the Rosh ha-Shanah liturgy is not itself particularly difficult; however, the precise channels of this influence remain obscure. We noted above that the Book of Mysteries illuminates the language of the prayer, not vice versa, even though the liturgical passage reflects the religious thought of the Dead Sea community. This literary aspect leads us, willy-nilly, to propose that both this section of the Rosh ha-Shanah liturgy and our passage in 1Qmysteries emerged from a common source, a source that was undoubtedly part of the Qumran literature. Indeed, the author of the Book of Mysteries testifies that the eschatological vision of the disappearance of all evil (lines 5\u20137) did not originate with him: \u201cThis word will undoubtedly happen, the prediction is truthful\u201d (line 8). However, the precise details that lead to the composition of the Essene Book of Mysteries within the Qumran sect, and of the High Holy Days passage outside it\u2014these remain unknown for want of evidence.<br \/>\nBe that as it may, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has cast a powerful light on the High Holy Days Amidah prayer. Moreover, the short passage at hand emerges as a key element in the history of Jewish liturgy: this appears to be the only known instance of discernible Essene influence on the religious creation of the sages. It seems to me that any explanation of this tangible influence of Qumran thought on the liturgy, must assume that the contact between these two very different worlds existed very early on. This conclusion paves the way for a renewed examination (although not in its earlier, simplistic form) that the \u201cWe pray, then, that you place your reverence\u201d (\u05ea\u05df \u05e4\u05ea\u05d3\u05da \u05d5\u05d1\u05db\u05df) passages of the High Holy Days liturgy did once serve as an introduction to the \u201cKingdom verses\u201d in the Palestinian liturgy, following the custom of Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri.<br \/>\nIn arriving at this conclusion we have sought to understand the meaning of the entire passage from the Book of Mysteries, and in so doing have gained a deeper understanding of the eschatological vision of Qumran and its influence on the New Testament. In addition, we have established 1Qmysteries as a singular witness to the influence of Greek philosophy on the Qumran community. It is our hope that in so doing we have been able to reveal something of the twists and turns of our Torah in the ancient past, a goal I share with the scholar to whom this study is dedicated.<\/p>\n<p>Appendix: The Book of Mysteries and the Haftarah Blessings (addendum to notes 14\u201315)<\/p>\n<p>The Book of Mysteries of Qumran states: \u201cThis word will undoubtedly happen, the prediction is truthful. And by this he will show you that [his word] will not return [unfulfilled].\u201d A parallel passage appears in the Hodayot (1QHa 5.24\u201325):<\/p>\n<p>For [you are the truth, and] your word does not return unfulfilled. And I, your servant, have known thanks to the spirit you have placed in me [\u2026] and all your deeds are just, and your word does not return unfulfilled.<\/p>\n<p>Here the language of the scrolls is very close to that of the blessings that come prior to and following the Haftarah reading. This is no coincidence since, as Heinemann states, these benedictions \u201cwere formulated very early on, centuries before the destruction of the Temple.\u201d The first of these benedictions states that God \u201cchose good prophets and showed favor toward their pronouncements, spoken in truth.\u201d The benediction asserts, then, not only that the words of the prophets are true, but that they are good and faithful prophets\u2014unlike the false prophets. The benediction following the Haftarah reading similarly asserts that God is faithful in all his deeds and adds\u2014in language reminiscent of the scrolls\u2014that his word will not return unfulfilled. The conclusion of the benediction: \u201cBlessed are you Lord, the faithful God in all his pronouncements.\u201d According to Amir, this conclusion reflects the letter nun verse in the acrostic Psalm 145, a verse that is famously absent from the Masoretic text but is attested in the Septuagint and the Peshitta, as well as one Medieval Hebrew manuscript. There we find: \u201cFaithful is the Lord in all his words and upright in all his deeds.\u201d Essentially the same verse is found in the Qumran psalter, with one significant difference: \u201cFaithful is God (Elohim) in all his words, etc.\u201d Now, the Qumran scribe took care throughout the psalm to preserve the Tetragrammaton (using the ancient Hebrew script), but in this problematic verse he does not do so, but rather replaces it with \u201cElohim,\u201d as is the custom in the explicitly sectarian compositions! In other words, the scribe knew that the verse in question was a late addition\u2014even though this addition was clearly made at an early time. Incidentally, the discussion thus far demonstrates that the Haftarah blessings are quite ancient.<\/p>\n<p>11.      Apocalyptic Elements in the War Scroll<\/p>\n<p>The War Scroll makes a single explicit reference to the \u201cking of the Kittim,\u201d at 15.2, though the biblical term Kittim is mentioned time and again. In order to understand the historical background of the War Scroll, it is best that we first establish the identity of the Kittim and of their king. The term Kittim is, as noted, biblical, mentioned inter alia in Numbers 24:24: \u201cShips shall come from Kittim\u201d (cf. Daniel 11:30). This verse is the primary reason that Jews in later times tended to refer to nations that arrived in Israel by ship as \u201cKittim.\u201d Josephus (AJ 1.128) states that the Hebrews call all the islands and many of the locations along the shore \u201cKittim.\u201d Thus we find that the term appears in Jewish sources in reference to both the Greeks and the Romans. For example, the Kittim mentioned in 1 Maccabees (1:1; 8:5) are Greek, while other Jewish sources attribute the term to Romans. The latter situation consistently holds in the Qumran Pesharim, texts that reflect the linguistic conventions of the Dead Sea community in the post-Pompey era. For example, Pesher Nahum refers to the Romans as Kittim, as it speaks of \u201cDemetrius, king of Yavan [= Greece]\u201d and \u201cthe kings of Yavan from Antiochus up to the appearance of the chiefs of the Kittim\u201d (1.2\u20133). Thus the Kittim of the War Scroll also refer to the Romans, but could possibly be a reference to the Greeks as well.<br \/>\nIt seems to me there are three factors that brought Yadin to the conclusion that the Kittim of the War Scroll are the Romans. First, aside from the War Scroll, the Kittim appear in the Qumran texts only in the Pesharim, and there they regularly refer to the Romans. Second, Yadin finds evidence in the War Scroll that the text was composed subsequently to the Roman conquest of Palestine, but before the end of Herod\u2019s reign. To my mind, however, the details in question cannot be counted as conclusive. Finally, at 1.4 there appears the phrase \u201cthe Kittim in Egypt\u201d which Yadin takes as evidence that the Kittim were located in Egypt at the time: \u201cNot \u2018of\u2019, as \u2018Kittim of Asshur [= Assyria].\u2019 This shows that the Kittim had an army in Egypt, not that they dwelt there.\u201d This suggestion does not exclude the possibility that the Kittim in Egypt were Greek, since the Seleucids and the Ptolemies were Greek. However, if the War Scroll does indicate that the Kittim were located in Egypt, it is more probable that this is a reference to the Romans and that the scroll was composed some time after Pompey\u2019s entrance into Egypt, or perhaps Julius Caesar\u2019s. In any case, whoever these Kittim might be, Yadin\u2019s authoritative interpretation of the passage as indicating that they reside in Egypt has led to a problematic reading of the first column and, subsequently, to implausible reconstructions. The new reconstructions I wish to propose do not in and of themselves constitute a new scholarly approach, as Dupont-Sommer has already employed a similar approach. My goal is rather to shed new light on the opening of the War Scroll and in so doing contribute both to the historical background of the scroll and to Jewish apocalypticism as such.<br \/>\nYadin (p. 18) sees the opening of the War Scroll as a parallel of sorts to what today would be called a \u2018strategic directive,\u2019 arguing (p. 7) that the first section of 1QM (1.1\u20137) defines \u201cthe opposing forces in the various phases of the war.\u201d According to Yadin, the main stages of the war are as follows: battle against \u201cthe band of Edom and of Moab and of the sons of Ammon and \u2026 Philistia \u2026 who are being helped by the violators of the covenant\u201d (1.1\u20132); next comes the battle against \u201cthe Kittim in Egypt\u201d (1.4), the second stage of the war. After the defeat of the Kittim comes the third stage of the war: that is when the warriors \u201cwill go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North\u201d (1.4), and then conquer all the lands of the world. This, then, is Yadin\u2019s understanding of the first column\u2014a \u2018strategic directive\u2019 of sorts. In what follows, I will argue that this text is best understood as presenting the historical background of the eschatological war, as well as a schematic outline of its course leading up to the victory over the Kittim in seven rounds.<br \/>\nHere are the two relevant passages from the War Scroll:<\/p>\n<p>1.      [The Rule of] the War. The first attack by the sons of light will be launched against the sons of darkness, against the army of Belial, against the band of Edom and of Moab and of the sons of Ammon<br \/>\n2.      and \u2026 Philistia, and against the bands of the Kittim of Assyria, who are being helped by the violators of the covenant. The sons of Levi, the sons of Judah and the sons of Benjamin, the exiled of the desert, will wage war against them.<br \/>\n3.      [\u2026] against all their bands, when the exiled sons of light return from the desert of the nations to camp in the desert of Jerusalem. And after the war, they shall go up from there<br \/>\n4.      [against the troops] of the Kittim in Egypt. And in his time, he will go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North, and in his anger wants to exterminate and cut off the horn of<br \/>\n5.      [Belial]. And this is a time of salvation for the nation of God and a period of rule for all the men of his lot, and of everlasting destruction for all the lot of Belial. There will be<br \/>\n6.      great panic among the sons of Japhet, Assyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end, wickedness having been defeated, with no remnant remaining, and there will be no escape<br \/>\n7.      for any of the sons of darkness.<\/p>\n<p>And further along we read:<\/p>\n<p>11.      \u2026 It will be a time of<br \/>\n12.      suffering for all the nation redeemed by God. Of all their sufferings, none will be like this, hastening till eternal redemption is fulfilled.<\/p>\n<p>We have already alluded to the connection between the opening column of the War Scroll and the Book of Daniel. The latter was highly esteemed by the Qumran community: the caves contain fragments of eight copies of the book. Let us examine the parallel passages in the War Scroll and Daniel:<\/p>\n<p>The War Scroll, Column 1<br \/>\nThe Book of Daniel<br \/>\n1\u20132: the band of Edom and of Moab and of the sons of Ammon and \u2026 Philistia, and against the bands of the Kittim of Assyria, who are being helped by the violators of the covenant<br \/>\n11:41 Edom and Moab and the main part of the Ammonites shall escape from his power<br \/>\n11:32 violators of the covenant<br \/>\n4: the Kittim in Egypt<br \/>\n11:42\u201343 He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape. He shall become ruler of \u2026 the riches of Egypt<br \/>\n4: And in his time, he will go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North, and in his anger wants to exterminate and cut off the horn [of Israel]<br \/>\n11:44 But reports from the east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great rage to exterminate and destroy many<br \/>\n5\u20136: There will be great panic among the sons of Japhet, Assyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end, wickedness having been defeated<br \/>\n11:45 He shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with no one to help him.<br \/>\n11\u201312: It will be a time of suffering for all the nation redeemed by God. Of all their sufferings, none will be like this<br \/>\n12:1 There shall be a time of suffering, such as has never occurred since the nation first came into existence.<\/p>\n<p>Two preliminary comments are in order. The War Scroll (lines 1\u20132) and Daniel both mention Edom, Moab and Ammon in the same order, but the author of 1QM appends at the end the \u201csons \u2026 of Philistia\u201d and \u201cthe Kittim of Assyria.\u201d These nations are also cited\u2014along with other enemies of Israel\u2014in Psalm 83:7\u20139: Edom, Moab and Ammon, Philistia and \u201cAssyria also has joined them.\u201d The War Scroll, like Psalm 83, mentions the Philistines and Assyrians at the end of the list, and it is quite possible that this psalm also exerted some influence on the scroll, along with Daniel (see also Isaiah 11:14, and note that Assyria is also mentioned in this chapter). But it seems to me that we are dealing here with more than literary influence, but rather a conscious attempt on the part of the author to enumerate as enemies all the nations in whose midst lived Jewish communities. True, the Philistines were not a living nation at the time, but the term Philistia appears in this sense in 1 Maccabees (3:41; 4:22; 5:66, 68). In both texts the term seems to refer to the gentiles who inhabit the coastline. Daniel 11 also reveals the end of the wicked king in the end of days: \u201che shall come to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d There is an allusion to this verse in the War Scroll, i.e., in the description of the ultimate defeat of the Kittim (1.6): \u201cAssyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end.\u201d In this statement, the author of 1QM merges Daniel 11:42 with Isaiah 31:8: \u201cThen Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals.\u201d This same verse is also cited in the War Scroll (11.11\u201312), again in an eschatological context. Still later, the War Scroll describes the ultimate death of the Kittim\u2014along with the other nations\u2014at God\u2019s sword (19.9\u201311). Already in the second line of 1QM the author introduces the \u201cKittim of Assyria,\u201d which suggests he may have understood Isaiah 31:8, with its description of Assyria and \u201ca sword, not of mortals,\u201d as a reference to the end of the reign of the Kittim. We will return to the nexus between \u201cKittim\u201d and \u201cAssyria\u201d later in the present study.<br \/>\nOther than the formula \u201cviolators of the covenant\u201d in line 2, which is found in Daniel 11:32, all the Daniel parallels in the first column of 1QS are from Daniel 11:40 and following, and their order parallels that of Daniel! I believe this fact is of particular importance, not only for understanding the Qumran scroll in question. The Hellenistic philosopher Porphyry, in his (lost) book against the Christians, argued that the visions of Daniel were composed during the days of Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), but presented as prophecies of future events. Modern scholarship has generally accepted Porphyry\u2019s argument, adding to it an additional assumption: the author of Daniel indeed describes as prophecies events that he knows to have occurred, but starting at 11:40, he breaks with the historical past and attempts to foresee the future\u2014though his prophecies do not come true. That the author of the War Scroll seems to have understood that the historical background of the events of the eschaton is described from Daniel 11:40 and following, suggests that modern scholarship is in the right. No less than modern scholars, the author of the 1QM knew that the prophecies recounted up to Daniel 11:39 had already occurred in the days of Antiochus IV, and that what follows has not yet come to fruition. He came to this (correct) conclusion without undue difficulty, since he was not far removed from these historical events, and undoubtedly knew more about them than we. Thus he also knew that the final section of the prophecy had not yet occurred, and, apocalyptic seer that he was, he drew the obvious conclusion: the unfulfilled prophecy\u2014Daniel 11:40 and following\u2014refers to future time. Thus he uses the statements in Daniel 11:40 and following as historical-political background to the eschatological war against the Kittim. That the War Scroll cites its allusions to Daniel in the order of the biblical verses is further proof of Daniel\u2019s key role for the Qumran author.<br \/>\nThe unfulfilled prophecies of Daniel are the continuation of the prophecy regarding Antiochus IV. There will be another war between him and the king of Egypt, and his campaign will lead him through the Land of Israel, but \u201cEdom and Moab and the main part of the Ammonites shall escape from his power.\u201d It would appear that the author of 1QM understands that these people, along with the inhabitants of Philistia, will be allied with this king. According to Daniel, the king will then proceed to Egypt and \u201cthe Land of Egypt shall not escape,\u201d though \u201creports from the east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great rage to exterminate and destroy many.\u201d In his campaign against these enemies (the War Scroll speaks only of \u201cthe kings of the North\u201d) he will again pass through Israel where he \u201cshall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d The Book of Daniel does not report the ultimate fate of the evil king. The author of the War Scroll, however, assumes that he will die in the war of seven rounds against the Jewish Sons of Light; in the seventh round he will be felled by the sword of the Almighty: \u201cAssyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end.\u201d<br \/>\nIn sketching the general outline of the parts of Daniel\u2019s prophecy that were not fulfilled in his lifetime, we referred briefly to the War Scroll\u2019s understanding of this prophecy. If we take it as an axiom that the first column of 1QM depends on the content of Daniel 11:40 and following (and not just its language), and that lines 4\u20137 reflect the prophecy concerning the evil king from the unfulfilled words of Daniel\u2014the task of reconstruction will be easier, and allow us to avoid the problems that arise from Yadin\u2019s suggestions. Moreover, if the opening of the War Scroll is indeed dependent upon Daniel, this will allow for a fuller understanding of the historical and political context\u2014according to 1QM\u2014of the eschatological war.<br \/>\nThe War Scroll opens with a description of the tribes of Israel who will participate in the war, namely \u201cthe sons of Levi, the sons of Judah and the sons of Benjamin.\u201d As for the enemies, they are \u201cthe Band of Edom and Moab and of the sons of Ammon and Philistia.\u201d As we have seen, this list is dependent upon Daniel 11:41, as well as other verses. All these nations, who inhabit the land of Israel, will join \u201cthe bands of the Kittim of Assyria, who are being helped by the violators of the covenant.\u201d The \u201cexiled sons of light\u201d then encamp in \u201cthe desert of Jerusalem. And after the war, they shall go up from there.\u201d I propose that this is the end of the sentence\u2014not only because this will allow us to propose a reasonable reconstruction of the opening of line 4. If we maintain the proposed reading, \u201cAnd after the war, they shall go up from there,\u201d the sense of the statement is that following the battle at the desert of Jerusalem against the Kittim of Assyria, the Sons of Light will ascend to Jerusalem. This is quite plausible, since the next stage in the warfare is the conquest of the entire world by separate divisions:<\/p>\n<p>During the remaining thirty-three years of the war, the men of renown, those called at the assembly, and all the chiefs of the fathers of the congregation, shall choose for themselves men of war for all the countries of the nations; from all the tribes of Israel they shall equip for themselves intrepid men, in order to go out on campaign according to the directives of war, year after year. (2.6\u20138)<\/p>\n<p>The assumption that the Sons of Light will ascend to Jerusalem following their war against the Kittim does not in and of itself determine whether Jerusalem is to be conquered by them during that war, or only in its wake. In any case, it appears that the War Scroll (like the other Qumran texts) assumes that Jerusalem is not originally under their rule, but rather is governed by the violators of the covenant who have allied themselves with the Kittim. Thus, the Sons of Light are located not in Jerusalem but in the wilderness of Jerusalem\u2014which would suggest that Jerusalem is conquered only after the defeat of the Kittim. Nonetheless, we do not have sufficient grounds to reject the possibility that Jerusalem falls to the Sons of Light in the course of the battles against the Kittim, though the community does not enter the city until after the outright defeat of the enemy. In either case there arises a problem, for if the ascent of the Sons of Light to Jerusalem marks the end of the conflict with the Kittim, we must conclude that the author of 1QM deals only with two stages of the war: the pseudo-historical eschatological war against the Kittim\u2014which truly interests him\u2014and a second, Utopian war in which the twelve tribes of Israel conquer the entire world during \u201cthe remaining thirty-three years of war\u201d (2.6)\u2014a war in which our author shows little interest.<br \/>\nAfter surveying the war in its broader context (in the eyes of the Sons of Light), he turns to the overall political climate of the time, and\u2014drawing on the unfulfilled prophecy of Daniel\u2014describes the circumstances in which the Kittim and their king enter Israel, concluding with an allusion to their ultimate downfall (1.4\u20137). To my mind, there is no doubt that the king of the Kittim is the central topic, both because of the evident linguistic links to Daniel 11:44, and because Yadin\u2019s suggestion that Daniel\u2019s description of the evil king be transposed to the Sons of Light leads to superfluous grammatical difficulties. With this in mind, line 4 should be reconstructed roughly as follows: \u201cThen came the king] of the Kittim in [= into] Egypt. And in this time, he will go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North, and in his anger wants to exterminate and cut off the horn of [Israel].\u201d]]. The use of \u2018Israel\u2019 is suggested by Lamentations 2:3 (\u201che has cut down in fierce anger the horn of Israel\u201d), though there the subject is the Lord. (Dupont-Sommer suggests \u2018\u05e7\u05e8\u05df \u05d0\u05d9\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u2019, that is, \u2018the horn of his enemies\u2019). The reading \u2018to exterminate and cut off the horn of Israel\u2019 is based on Daniel 11:44, where it is reported that the evil king \u201cshall go out with great rage to exterminate and destroy many.\u201d On Yadin\u2019s reading, the extermination in question must be a positive event, and thus he implausibly assumes the phrase refers to the destruction of Belial. As noted, my own reconstruction finds linguistic support in Lamentations 2:3, and it seems to me that the word \u05dc\u05d4\u05db\u05e8\u05d9\u05ea (\u2018cut down\u2019)\u2014Daniel 11:44 reads \u05dc\u05d4\u05d7\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd (\u2018exterminate\u2019) instead\u2014is so strong that we must assume that the author of 1QM understood the \u201cmany\u201d of Daniel as a reference to Israel. That is, the king sets out \u201cin his time,\u201d departing from Egypt \u201cwith great rage to wage war against the kings of the North,\u201d and on his way north quite naturally passes through Israel, where \u201cin his anger [he] wants to exterminate and cut off the horn\u201d of Israel. The assumption that the evil king set out specifically to destroy the horn of Israel finds support in the later statement (1.11\u201312): \u201cIt will be a time of suffering for all the nation redeemed by God. Of all their sufferings, none will be like this, hastening till eternal redemption is fulfilled.\u201d While this verse deals with the difficulties brought on by the war, there is also an indirect reference to the dangers of destruction posed by the invasion of the king of the Kittim and his armies.<br \/>\nDaniel 11:44 tells of the evil king\u2019s passage from Egypt to Israel, \u201cbut reports from the east and the north shall alarm him.\u201d The War Scroll omits any mention of the east, stating that after his departure from Egypt, the king of the Kittim \u201cwill go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North\u201d (1.4). The mention of these kings is not dependent solely on Daniel, though this is clearly the main source. The \u201ckings of the north\u201d are the rulers of Parthia and of Armenia, as well as other traditional enemies of the Seleucid Empire and of their Roman heirs.<br \/>\nBefore turning to the end of the king of the Kittim, we must point to one conclusion that may already be drawn from the War Scroll\u2019s employment of Daniel\u2019s unfulfilled prophecy. According to Daniel 11:42\u201343, the evil king will invade Egypt, and indeed the War Scroll mentions Egypt as well (1.4). I have reconstructed this line in light of the remainder of the verse (\u201che will go out with great rage\u201d), which makes it clear that we are dealing with the evil king from Daniel\u2019s vision. If so, Egypt is the object of the king\u2019s invasion, and it would be an error to read the scroll as stating that the Kittim live in Egypt. Even without the evidence of Daniel it is clear that the War Scroll does not suggest that the Kittim inhabit Egypt. At the same time, 1QM does refer to \u201cthe bands of the Kittim of Assyria\u201d (1.2)\u2014what does this phrase mean?<br \/>\nGenesis 10:22 lists Assyria as one of the sons of Shem. Accordingly, in describing Israel\u2019s conquest of the entire world, the War Scroll speaks of a war waged \u201cagainst all the sons of Assyria and Persia, and the eastern nations up to the great desert\u201d (2.12). That is, Assyria appears here in the proper geographic context. According to Genesis 10:4, however, the Kittim are the sons of Japhet, and indeed the author of the War Scroll groups the Kittim of Assyria with the sons of Japhet: \u201cThere will be great panic among the sons of Japhet, Assyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end, wickedness having been defeated\u201d (1.5\u20136). These groupings are repeated in the summary of the seventh and final stage of the war against the Kittim, which includes \u201cthe call of the holy ones when they pursue Assyria; the sons of Japhet shall fall without rising; the Kittim shall be crushed\u201d (18.2). Yadin explains the phrase \u201cKittim of Assyria\u201d and the apparent synonymity of \u201cAssyria\u201d and \u201cKittim\u201d in a number of places in the War Scroll, since \u201cin at least three places in the Bible in which the Kittim are mentioned, Assyria also is mentioned and in close proximity.\u201d But do these three instances of proximity truly explain the War Scroll\u2019s use of \u201cAssyria\u201d as a synonym for \u201cKittim\u201d? And what of the phrase \u201cKittim of Assyria\u201d? Perhaps there is a historical reason for this identification.<br \/>\nIt is a well-established fact that the Greek and Roman authors referred to the Syrians as \u201cAssyrians.\u201d Grintz already suggested that \u201cAssyria\u201d in the phrase \u201cKittim of Assyria\u201d refers to Syria. As evidence he cites, and rightly so, Jubilees 13.1, a work that is very similar to the Dead Sea Scrolls, as well as the teachings of the dorshei reshumot preserved in Midrash ha-Gadol to Numbers 21:2. The midrashic passage discusses the six kingdoms that will reign over Israel\u2014the Babylonians, Medes, Persians, Greeks, Assyrians, and Romans. The order of these kingdoms indicates that \u201cAssyria\u201d here refers to the Syrian empire of the Seleucids. Another list, this time of five kingdoms, has been preserved in the writings of Lactantius, and is apparently taken from the so-called the \u201cOracles of Hystaspes\u201d (or: \u201cThe Prophecy of Hystaspes\u201d), a Jewish apocalypse from the time of the Second Temple. Here we find Egypt, Persia, Greece, Assyria, and Rome, and again it would appear that \u201cAssyria\u201d refers to the Syrian empire of the Seleucids. Syria is referred to as \u201cAssyria\u201d not only in Greek and Roman sources, but in Jewish writings as well\u2014including Hebrew ones (Jubilees and the material preserved in Midrash ha-Gadol). It would appear, then, that the War Scroll\u2019s designation of Israel\u2019s primary enemy as \u201cAssyria,\u201d most likely refers to Syria, so that the Kittim of Assyria in fact live in Syria (the biblical verses notwithstanding). This hypothesis finds further support from the fact\u2014noted above\u2014that there is no certain indication in the War Scroll that the Kittim lived in Egypt. To the contrary, it stands to reason that the author of the War Scroll assumed that the king of the Kittim of (As)syria intended to invade Egypt.<br \/>\nThe term \u201cAssyria,\u201d as a reference to the sworn enemy of Israel, paves the way for the War Scroll to harness the relevant biblical verses to the ultimate, supernatural end of the Kittim and their king. As noted, the author of 1QM states: \u201cThere will be great panic among the sons of Japhet, Assyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end, wickedness having been defeated\u201d (1.5\u20136). The phrase \u201cAssyria shall fall and there will be no help for him\u201d combines elements from Isaiah 31:8 and Daniel 11:45. In a yet-unfulfilled prophecy\u2014cited as part of the pseudo-historical background of the War Scroll\u2014Daniel describes the king\u2019s departure from Egypt and his ultimate end: \u201cBut reports from the east and the north shall alarm him, and he shall go out with great fury to bring ruin and complete destruction to many. He shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with no one to help him\u201d (Dan. 11:44\u201345). That is to say, the king will leave Egypt, passing through Israel on his way to battle against his enemies of the east and the north. There he will pitch camp \u201cbetween the sea and the beautiful holy mountain\u201d and \u201ccome to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d The evil king finds his death in the \u201cdesert of Jerusalem\u201d (1.3), where the \u201cexiled sons of light\u201d are located, and where they will engage the Kittim armies. However, the evil king will not die during the battle, for Daniel has already stated that he will \u201ccome to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d This favors the view of those scholars who understand Daniel\u2019s obscure statement as referring to death brought on by divine intervention, as Daniel 8:25 seems to suggest, where the prophet says that the evil king \u201cshall be broken, and not by human hands.\u201d<br \/>\nThis appears to be the War Scroll\u2019s understanding of Daniel 11:45, since the scroll describes the end of \u201cAssyria\u201d in the following terms: \u201che shall come to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d The first hemistich is from Isaiah 31:8: \u201cThen Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals; and a sword, not of humans, shall devour him.\u201d This verse is cited explicitly in the benediction at 11.11\u201312: \u201cFrom of old you foretold us the appointed time of the power of your hand against the Kittim saying \u2018Assyria will fall by a sword, not of mortals etc.\u2019&nbsp;\u201d If Daniel 11:45 suggests that the king of the Kittim will die a miraculous death due to divine intervention, Isaiah 31:8 teaches that not only the king, but his entire army will be felled \u201cby a sword, not of mortals.\u201d This, then, will be the supernatural conclusion of the war with the Kittim, in its seventh and final round. At that time, when the persecution of the Kittim had begun, the sons of light will have to give up the chase \u201cwhen the sun travels towards its setting on that day\u201d (18.5). They return to camp and \u201cthey shall gather in the camp on that night to rest until the morning. And in the morning they shall go out to the place of the battle.\u201d There they witness God\u2019s wondrous intervention: \u201c[T] he heroes of the Kittim, the horde of Assyria and the army of all the peoples that had gathered together, (to see) the slain \u2026 which had fallen there by God\u2019s sword\u201d (19.9\u201311). Indeed, there was an earlier mention of \u2018God\u2019s sword\u2019: \u201cAll those who are ready for the war shall go and camp opposite the king of the Kittim and opposite all the army of Belial, assembled with him for the day of vengeance by God\u2019s sword\u201d (15.2\u20133)\u2014a clear allusion to the miraculous end of the battle with the Kittim. This passage is the only extant text of 1QM to contain the phrase \u2018king of the Kittim.\u2019 (The occurrence at 1.4 is a reconstruction based on the context.) It also states explicitly that both the king and the armies of the Kittim will be destroyed together, as the soldiers are \u201cassembled with him for the day of vengeance by God\u2019s sword.\u201d<br \/>\nIn both its occurrences, the Hebrew phrase translated as \u2018God\u2019s sword\u2019 appears as a single word, \u05d7\u05e8\u05d1\u05d0\u05dc, indicating it was an established eschatological term in Qumran circles. As an eschatological motif, however, God\u2019s sword has currency beyond the Qumran community. 1 Enoch, a work composed during the days of Judah Maccabee, teaches (1 Enoch 90.19, 34) that in the end of days Israel will be given a great sword that will be wielded as they go to war against the nations. With the battle won, the sword will be returned to the Temple and set before God. This suggests that the sword was previously located (or appeared) in the Temple. A few decades later, the author of the third Sibylline oracle states (lines 781\u2013782) that when peace comes, in the end of days, the prophets of the great God will guard the sword, for they will be the judges of man as well as their righteous kings. And while Enoch has the sword taken from the temple, in the \u201cOracles of Hystaspes,\u201d another Jewish apocalyptic work from the time of the temple, the sword will suddenly descend from the heavens at midnight on Passover eve. This descent announces to the righteous, that is to Israel, that the messiah, who heads the holy army, will himself descend from the heavens accompanied by angels, with a burning fire before him. The apocalyptic motif of God\u2019s sword at the end of days no doubt grew out of Isaiah 31:8: \u201cThen Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals; and a sword, not of humans, shall devour him.\u201d We saw above that this verse is cited in the War Scroll (11.11\u201312). The author of 1QM, unlike 1 Enoch, learns from the verse that the sword of God, not a human hand, will fell the enemy. The author buttresses this interpretation with the unfulfilled prophecy from Daniel (11:45, and compare 8:25), according to which the evil king \u201cshall come to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d<br \/>\nBut let us return to the beginning of the war. I have no doubt that Yadin\u2019s reconstruction of line four of the War Scroll is wrong and, moreover, that a correct understanding of the opening is key to interpreting the scroll as a whole. Yadin (p. 10) rightly points to two passages in the War Scroll from which we may infer the overall structure of the battles against the Kittim. The first occurs in the opening of the scroll, 1.12\u201314: \u201cAnd on the day of their war against the Kittim, they shall go out to destruction. In the war, the sons of light will be the strongest during three lots, in order to strike down wickedness; and in three (others), the army of Belial will gird themselves in order to force the lot of light to retreat. There will be infantry battalions to melt the heart, but God\u2019s might will strengthen the heart of the sons of light. And in the seventh lot, God\u2019s great hand will subdue \u2026\u201d This description indicates that there will be seven lots or rounds, the seventh of which will witness the downfall of the Kittim by the hand of God, without human warfare. The end of the Kittim is couched here in terms reminiscent of the destruction without battle of the Egyptians at the crossing of the Red Sea, when \u201cIsrael saw the great hand that the Lord brought against the Egyptians\u201d (Ex. 14:31). As for the previous six rounds of battle, these are described elsewhere, i.e., 17.16\u201318.3. The sons of light find themselves alternately victors and vanquished, but again the seventh lot brings ultimate victory, \u201cwhen the mighty hand of God is raised against Belial and against all the army of his dominion for an everlasting blow\u201d (18.1).<br \/>\nThe series of battles with the Kittim is relatively clear. However, as seen above, a novel interpretation of the scroll\u2019s opening calls for a new understanding of the precise relationship between the Kittim war and the subsequent conquest of the world. If 1.4 refers to the Kittim\u2019s invasion of Egypt\u2014and not, as Yadin holds, to the war of the sons of light against the Kittim of Egypt\u2014then it is no longer possible to speak of this as \u201cthe second phase, preparatory to the fight against the \u2018kings of the north,\u2019 which is part of the \u2018war of separate divisions\u2019&nbsp;\u201d\u2014a war of conquest. In fact, there are only two stages or, more accurately, two wars: the seven lots of war fought against the Kittim, and the war of separate divisions that begins after God\u2019s sword has destroyed the Kittim. The latter begins when the \u201cexiled sons of light\u201d march from the wilderness of Jerusalem to the city itself (see 1.3). There is another important difference between the first war (against the Kittim in the wilderness of Jerusalem), and the \u2018war of separate divisions\u2019 for world domination. The battle against the Kittim and their allies will be waged by the \u201csons of Levi, the sons of Judah and the sons of Benjamin, the exiled of the desert\u201d (1.2)\u2014apparently a reference to the sons of light; in the \u2018year of release\u2019 (shemitah) following the Kittim war, \u201cthe chiefs of the tribes, and after them the fathers of the congregation, shall take their positions in the gate of the sanctuary in perpetuity\u201d (2.3). As for the conquest of the world\u2014slated to begin after that year of release\u2014we learn: \u201cDuring the remaining thirty-three years of the war, the men of renown, those called at the assembly, and all the chiefs of the fathers of the congregation, shall choose for themselves men of war for all the countries of the nations; from all the tribes of Israel they shall equip for themselves intrepid men, in order to go out on campaign \u2026\u201d (2.6\u20138). Clearly, the author of the War Scroll believes that after the Kittim war, perhaps in the beginning of the first year of release, the remaining tribes of Israel will return as functioning members of the nation already in the course of that year. Perhaps there was a reference to the ingathering of the tribes of Israel in the now lost end of the first column.<br \/>\nAs for the division of the different stages into clusters of years, Yadin\u2019s discussion and calculations (pp. 20\u201321, as well as 36\u201337) are a brilliant scholarly achievement. The war will last forty years, the first six of which are fought against the Kittim. As noted, Yadin divides the latter period into two stages: the first against the Kittim of Assyria, followed by battle against the Kittim of Egypt. However, it appears that this six-year period constitutes a single stage in the war during which the sons of light do battle against the Kittim and their evil king in the wilderness of Jerusalem. The scroll suggests that the battle against the Kittim will begin in a year following a year of release, shemitah. If so, the year of release mentioned in the second column is the first to follow the destruction of the Kittim and their king by God\u2019s sword. After the first seven-year period, during \u201cthe remaining thirty-three years of the war\u201d (2.6) Israel will conquer the world, with each enemy requiring a single year of battle\u2014except for the sons of Arpachshad, who are battled for two years, the fourth and the fifth (2.11). We have already established that the Kittim war will occur during the first six years of the first shemitah cycle, and that it will contain seven lots or rounds. During the first six, Israel will experience intermittently victory and defeat, but during the seventh lot the Kittim and their allies will be destroyed through divine intervention, the sword of God. All this suggests that each of the first six rounds is allotted a single year, each of which contains a single decisive battle. The sixth year is, apparently, exceptional inasmuch as that at its end there will be a second, ultimate and supernatural battle. Were it not for the fact that the end of the scroll speaks of the sons of light girding themselves for battle and of their surprise in the face of the miracle, it might have been assumed that the divine intervention will occur in the seventh, i.e., shemitah, year. However, wars are generally not permitted during shemitah, so it appears that the battle could occur in the seventh year only if the sectarian halakhah would allow warfare during the shemitah in cases of a religiously sanctioned war\u2014very unlikely in light of their generally strict halakhic rulings. Thus it is more probable that the seventh stage of the Kittim war is to occur at the very end of the sixth year. Moreover, the ultimate and absolute victory over the Kittim, achieved as it is through divine intervention, represents a worthy opening to the year of release. That said, our discussion of the timeline of the Kittim war and of the ingathering of the tribes of Israel, remains a conjecture, albeit one that suits the schematic and almost mechanistic schematics of the Dead Sea community.<br \/>\nBefore concluding our discussion we must ask what, if anything, can be learned regarding the time of the War Scroll\u2019s composition. We saw that the political situation, a prerequisite for the Kittim war, accords with the unfulfilled prophecy of Daniel, that is, that Daniel\u2019s vision was made to fit with the hopes and fears of Second Temple Jewry in general, and of the Qumran community in particular. As noted, the word \u201cKittim\u201d could refer either to Greeks or to Romans, and it was plausible in the eyes of 1QM\u2019s author that the Kittim king be located in Syria, from which he would invade Egypt. But he will leave Egypt, for \u201cin his time, he will go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North\u201d (1.4), i.e., the Parthians and their allies. In traversing this path, he will cross through Israel, seeking \u201cin his anger\u201d to destroy the Jews. Such is the hypothetical political situation preceding the eschatological war with the Kittim. If we assume that the War Scroll was composed after the Romans conquered Syria, but before they conquered Egypt, then the identification of the Kittim as Romans is quite plausible. If, however, the phrase \u201cKittim of Assyria\u201d (1.2) and the verse \u201cAssyria shall fall and there will be no help for him; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end\u201d (1.6) suggest a stronger link between the Kittim and Syria, then the Kittim of Assyria would be the Syrian Greeks and their king one of the Seleucid rulers, suggesting that the scroll was composed before Pompey annexed Syria to the Roman empire. The date of composition would be some time during the Hasmonean rule prior to 83 B.C.E., when Tigranes II of Armenia conquered Syria, ending the Seleucid rule. During the Seleucid rule it was the north that presented the danger, the Parthian regions, and there was a constant enmity between the Syrian Seleucids and the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt. It is possible, then, that during a period of particularly elevated tension between the two kingdoms, the author of 1QM might well prophesy that Daniel\u2019s vision is near fulfillment, and the Kittim king will invade Egypt. The phrase \u201cking of the Kittim\u201d also suggests a Seleucid era composition, since the scrolls published thus far speak of the Roman leaders as \u201crulers of the Kittim (\u05de\u05d5\u05e9\u05dc\u05d9 \u05db\u05ea\u05d9\u05dd),\u201d rather than kings. In any case, whether we identify the Kittim as Romans or as Syrian Greeks, it appears that the scroll was composed prior to the Roman annexation of Egypt. In an earlier study, I tried to trace the chronological development of the Qumran ideology. I suggested that the War Scroll was composed in the early stages of the sect.<br \/>\nIn presenting our concluding statement, it is worth citing the principal statement from the opening of the War Scroll, as I reconstruct the text:<\/p>\n<p>The first attack by the sons of light will be launched against the lot of the sons of darkness, against the army of Belial, against the band of Edo and of Moab and of the sons of Ammon and the a[rmies of the inhabitants of] Philistia, and against the bands of the Kittim of Assyria, who are being helped by the violators of the covenant. The sons of Levi, the sons of Judah and the sons of Benjamin, the exiled of the desert, will wage war against them [\u2026] against all their bands, when the exiled sons of light return from the desert of the nations to camp in the desert of Jerusalem. And after the war, they shall go up from there. [And the king] of the Kittim [will come to] Egypt. And in his time he will go out with great rage to wage war against the kings of the North, and in his anger wants to exterminate and cut off the horn of Israel.\u2026 There will be great panic among the sons of Japhet, Assyria shall fall and there will be no help for them; the rule of the Kittim will come to an end, wickedness having been defeated, with no remnant remaining, and there will be no escape for any of the sons of darkness. (1.1\u20137)<\/p>\n<p>Yadin\u2019s error is, I believe, fundamentally optical: since the beginning of line 4 is not extant, the first Hebrew words that present themselves to the reader\u2019s eye are \u05d4\u05db\u05ea\u05d9\u05dd \u05d1\u05de\u05e6\u05e8\u05d9\u05dd, which can naturally be understood as referring to Kittim who reside in Egypt. The first scholar who made this assumption was E. L. Sukenik, and Yadin, his son, follows in his footsteps. This error was then compounded with an implausible reconstruction of the beginning of the line, forcing Yadin to argue that the subject of \u201cAnd in his time he will go out with great rage\u201d is either the sons of light or God Himself. In fact, this is almost a verbatim repetition of Daniel 11:44, whose subject is the evil king of the end of days. Yadin\u2019s error changed the original opening of the scroll, which is nothing more than an attempt to apply the unfulfilled prophecy of Daniel to contemporary times.<br \/>\nWe have been able to address a number of aspects of the War Scroll, to resolve a few difficulties and raise hypotheses regarding the eschatological vision of the Qumran community. It appears that if we gain a better understanding of the first column, we may gain meaningful insights into the essence of Jewish apocalypticism. The author of Daniel gave an account of past events as though they were to occur in the future, but when he needed to predict future events he fabricated them full cloth. Modern scholars are not the only ones who have been able to ascertain the difference between the historical \u201cprophecies\u201d and unfulfilled predictions\u2014the author of the War Scroll distinguished between these two categories as well. This is apparently the reason he took Daniel\u2019s unfulfilled prophecy to be a reference to the backdrop for the eschaton. This shift was possible, because the political situation of his day reminded him of the visions of Daniel.<br \/>\nIn other words, the eschatological vision of the War Scroll is predicated on an actualizing interpretation of Daniel\u2019s unfulfilled prophecy. The author rightly understood that the obscure verse from Daniel means that the evil king will die as a result of divine intervention, and it is this understanding that guides the War Scroll\u2019s interpretation of Isaiah 31:8: \u201cThen Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals; and a sword, not of humans, shall devour him.\u201d It is likely that this verse generated a Jewish apocalyptic motif that has the wicked enemies of Israel falling before God\u2019s sword in the end of days. But while some interpreters held that Israel will be given the sword of God and use it in their battles, the War Scroll interpreted this motif in light of Daniel\u2019s vision. That is, the Kittim and their king will be killed by God\u2019s sword without human intervention. Then will the mighty hand of God be revealed, just as at the time of the Exodus from Egypt, and so the ultimate redemption will be like the first.<br \/>\nIt is fairly clear, then, how and why the Dead Sea community incorporated into its eschatological and redemptive vision both the prophecy of Daniel and the motif of God\u2019s sword. The motif of seven lots or rounds in the Kittim war is another utopian motif added to the two just discussed. I know of only one parallel to it, namely in the apocalypse known as the \u201cOracles of Hystaspes.\u201d According to this account, on Passover eve at midnight, a sword will descend from the heavens, followed by the Messiah accompanied by angels, and they will wage war against all the armies of the evil king. The armies will be defeated, but the king will escape and renew the war several times until finally he too will be defeated in the fourth battle and taken captive. Then he and all his armies will stand in judgment before the Messiah-King for their crimes. In this text, then, we find a preliminary victory for Israel, followed by four additional rounds, or five in total. It stands to reason that in the \u201cOracles of Hystaspes\u201d the rounds ended alternately in victory and defeat for Israel. According to both Hystaspes and the War Scroll, then, there will be an odd number of rounds (five and seven, respectively) and Israel will be victorious in the first\u2014thus ensuring Israel\u2019s ultimate victory.<br \/>\nBut we do not yet have a full picture of the eschatological vision of the War Scroll, as the Kittim war is only the first stage in a forty-year conflict. It appears that it will commence in the first year of the shemitah cycle, and the first six battles will occur in intervals of one year, up until the final divine intervention that will occur near the first shemitah year of the war. During that same shemitah year all twelve tribes will apparently gather in Israel, and with the passing of the year the tribes will establish Jerusalem as their base and wage the war of separate divisions from it, eventually conquering the entire world. The War Scroll seems to be building on a sophisticated eschatological doctrine. Despite all the contemporary scholarship on this topic, and despite the similar phenomena in our own day, it is not easy to understand the minds of apocalyptic authors, especially with regard to their systematic constructs\u2014completely groundless\u2014that they believe will come to be realized. And it is that much more difficult when it comes to certain of the Qumran texts, such as the War Scroll: not only did they believe their fantastic plans would come to fruition, they allotted themselves a central and active role in effecting a chain of events that they themselves fabricated. In order to convince his readers that these are not mere fantasies, the author of the War Scroll added to his schematic plan detailed discussions on the laws of war, tactics, liturgical rules, and more. Indeed, these make up most of the scroll. In this, the War Scroll is similar to the descriptions of Jerusalem in the end of days and to the Temple Scroll\u2014while the purely apocalyptic elements are marginalized. Reading the War Scroll, one cannot help but wonder if the author assumed the readers\u2019 familiarity with the broad outlines of the eschatological scheme, thus allowing him to touch on them only briefly, and sometimes, perhaps, not at all. This style makes it difficult for today\u2019s scholars to extract from the War Scroll a clear picture of its redemptive schema, and, as shown, some of the details remain obscure. Are we to assume that the War Scroll was based in part on an apocalyptic text from Qumran that focused exclusively on the events and the structure of the end of days, and that this was the starting point of our text? But even if we assume that the apocalyptic framework predates the War Scroll, it is nonetheless clear that the author of the scroll enriched and reworked the material according to his taste and to his understanding. In any case, the apocalyptic elements in the War Scroll constitute a fascinating and important link in the ongoing chain of Jewish apocalyptic thought. It is important to address the schematic dimension of the text\u2014one that has nothing to do with Realpolitik\u2014in trying to categorize the War Scroll of Qumran.<\/p>\n<p>12.      The Death of the Wicked King<\/p>\n<p>Jacob Licht, in memoriam<\/p>\n<p>One of Jacob Licht\u2019s fields of expertise was, of course, the Dead Sea Scrolls. Any scholar who approaches these texts faces two main obstacles: our knowledge of the sect\u2019s history is in most cases sketchy and wanting, and even the well-preserved scrolls usually contain lacunae, to say nothing of the many fragments that have reached us, which are notoriously difficult to decipher. The present study deals with a group of such fragments, in light of the paramount importance of one of them.<br \/>\nThe fragments are of what scholars refer to as the \u201cWar Rule,\u201d marked as 4Q285. The content is very similar to the \u201cWar Scroll\u201d (1QM); that much is clear. There is also reason to believe that the War Scroll fragments may originally have been the sectarian continuation of 1QM, but that they were not preserved in the main copy because they deal with the final stage of the war of the sons of light against the evil kingdom\u2014a part not covered by the \u201cwhole\u201d scroll. The following fragment is of particular importance:<\/p>\n<p>[\u2026 as] the Prophet Isaiah said (10:34\u201311:1): \u201cHe will hack down the thickets of the forest with an ax, and Lebanon by a majestic one will fall. A shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse [\u2026] the bud of David. And they will judge [\u2026] and the Prince of Congregation will kill him [\u2026] and with wound. And the High Priest will command [\u2026] the slain of the Kittim. (4Q285, fragment 5)<\/p>\n<p>The Jewish apocalyptic texts we will cite below show just how incorrect it is to suppose that this fragment deals with the death of the messiah. It is clear that the evil ruler will be judged and executed by the prince of the congregation, that is, the messiah who is born of the Davidic line. The other fragments shed some light on the circumstances of this trial. We learn that prior to the trial the king is brought before the prince of the congregation where he will be judged, a procedure that follows some sort of naval war, in which the prince of the congregation plays a major role. The enemies\u2014the Kittim of the War Scroll\u2014will flee before Israel. Will the Kittim drown in the sea? No definitive answer can be given, but it is nonetheless clear that there is some link between the narrative of the War Rule and the biblical death of the Egyptians at the Red Sea.<br \/>\nIf so, the identity of the judge is known, and as for the identity of the man to be judged and executed, he is most likely the king of the Kittim. The problem is that we know nothing of his character or his role in the eschatological drama. He is mentioned explicitly only once in the War Scroll (15.2), and according to my reconstruction he is mentioned a second time in the opening of the scroll (1.4), a reconstruction that is almost definite. The opening of the scroll indicates that the king of the Kittim will fulfill the role of the evil king mentioned in Daniel 11:40. The downfall of this king is described by Daniel as follows: \u201cHe shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with no one to help him\u201d\u2014a description sorely lacking in details. The scroll does not describe the chief of the armies of evil in terms of his involvement in the fighting, an omission that is, to be sure, somewhat odd. However, in considering the overall character of the composition, we may see this omission as part and parcel of the marginalization of the purely eschatological elements. The reader of the War Scroll cannot but wonder if its author assumes that his audience is familiar with the basic eschatological stages, and thus there is no need to elaborate, or even dwell on them. Is it possible that one of the War Scroll\u2019s sources was an apocalyptic sectarian composition that dealt solely with the nature and order of the eschatological events, and that this was, in fact, the starting point of the War Scroll?<br \/>\nWhether or not this is the case, the new fragments help fill in a number of lacunas regarding the death of this evil leader, as well as elements that shed new light on the events of the War Scroll\u2014particularly once we read the War Rule in light of the various Jewish apocalyptic traditions.<br \/>\nHowever, before we turn to this task, we must address the sectarian author\u2019s interpretation of Isaiah 10:34\u201311:1. Isaiah 10:34 speaks of \u2018the Lebanon,\u2019 a term whose typological significance in Jewish sources has been recognized by scholars. What of the Qumran writings? Pesher Habakkuk (11.17\u201312.6), which discusses Habakkuk 2:17, cannot be directly adduced for the matter at hand, since \u2018Lebanon\u2019 appears there (12.3\u20134) in a positive light: \u201cLebanon is the Council of the Community.\u201d On the other hand, it is clear that Pesher Nahum does contain a relevant passage, namely 2.1\u20138. Unfortunately, the condition of the text will not allow any definitive conclusions. It has already been established that the Kittim in Pesher Nahum are the Romans. One part of the composition\u2014the relevant part to our discussion\u2014is a sectarian interpretation to Nahum 1:3\u20134, dealing with God\u2019s will to \u201ccarry out judgment against them and eliminate them from the face of the earth\u201d (1.4\u20135), and there is no doubt that the author understood the biblical phrase \u201cthe bloom of Lebanon\u201d in the same negative sense. Another Qumran passage (4Q161)\u2014a sectarian interpretation of Isaiah 10:33\u201334\u2014may also be relevant (i.e., 3.1\u201313), but here again the text is poorly preserved. This fragment interprets the same verse in Isaiah that we find in the fragment of the War Rule under discussion. In Pesher Isaiah (4Q161) there is a clear connection between the Kittim and Lebanon: the Kittim will \u201cbe placed in the hands of Israel\u201d (1.3); there are also references to \u201cthe soldiers of the Kittim\u201d and \u201cthe war of the Kittim.\u201d Of particular significance is the statement that \u201c&nbsp;\u2018and Lebanon by a majestic one will fall,\u2019 they are the commanders of the Kittim, who will be placed in the hand of great ones \u2026\u201d (3.7\u20138), though the rest of the pesher to Isaiah 10:33 did not survive. The orthographic conventions of the scrolls allow for a reading of the last Hebrew word as \u05d2\u05d3\u05d5\u05dc\u05d9\u05d5, \u2018great ones\u2019; however, the singular form, \u05d2\u05d3\u05d5\u05dc\u05d5, \u2018a great one,\u2019 precisely glosses the words of the prophet: \u201cand Lebanon by a majestic one will fall.\u201d Here the majestic one is the shoot of David, the Messiah. As we will see, the War Rule interprets Isaiah 10:34\u201311:1 to similar effect.<br \/>\nLike Pesher Isaiah (4Q161), the War Rule (4Q285) discusses the end of Isaiah 10 and the opening verse of 11, interpreting messianic prophecy of the latter as a continuation of chapter 10. Thus, if Isaiah 10:34 states that \u201cthe Lebanon by a majestic one will fall,\u201d the prophet\u2019s words indicate that the prince of the congregation, the shoot of David, will kill the wicked one, who is undoubtedly the king of the Kittim. First, the prince of the congregation participates (as a general?) in the naval battle, at the end of which the enemies \u201cwill flee from Israel.\u201d The wicked one, however, is caught and \u201cthey shall bring him before the Prince of the Congregation\u201d (4Q285, fragment 4), where he is judged and executed. The Pesher Isaiah fragment too refers to the wicked king\u2019s \u201c\u2026 flight before Israel\u201d (4Q161 3.9), and this may be a reference to the flight of the king of the Kittim. The fragments of the War Rule are few and do not provide a clear picture of the naval battle, nor of the execution of the king\u2019s death sentence. It is possible, however, that two other apocalyptic texts do provide additional details concerning the end of the ultimate war against the armies of evil.<br \/>\nDid the remnants of the War Rule once belong to the end of the War Scroll, now lost, or perhaps they originate in another composition that covers the same material? Though no definitive answer is possible at this time, it is undoubtedly significant that not one of the details discussed in the War Scroll conflicts in any way with the views expressed in the fragmentary remains of the War Rule. I once suggested, in light of Daniel 11:45, that the evil king will ultimately be killed with his armies: \u201cAssyria shall fall and there shall be no help for it\u201d (1QM 1.6). True, it would be reasonable to assume that the king of the Kittim would also be killed on this occasion, but that part of the narrative was lost, along with all the concluding section of the War Scroll. According to 1QM, the enemies of Israel will be completely annihilated, apparently based on Daniel 11:45, which tells the following of the evil king: \u201cHe shall pitch his palatial tents between the sea and the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he shall come to his end, with no one to help him.\u201d How exactly all this is to come about, however, remains unclear. The War Scroll states: \u201cFrom of old you foretold us the appointed time of the power of your hand against the Kittim, saying \u2018Then Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals\u2019&nbsp;\u201d (11.11\u201312). Apparently the author held that this prophecy will come to fruition in its most literal sense, i.e., that the enemy will come to a supernatural end by God\u2019s sword, though even here we are lacking information on the death of the king of the Kittim.<br \/>\nThere is no doubt that the description of Israel\u2019s enemies coming to an unnatural end was influenced by the story of Sennacherib\u2019s army\u2019s defeat, though it should be noted that here too Sennacherib himself survives. The publication of the War Rule fragments suggests that the ultimate destruction of the armies of the Kittim may also be related to the drowning of the Egyptians in the Red Sea. When the armies of the Kittim are destroyed, then the words of Scripture will be fulfilled: \u201cIsrael saw the great work that the Lord did against the Egyptians\u201d (Ex. 14:31), and the final redemption will be like unto the first. All this will happen in the seventh round of battles, \u201cAnd in the seventh lot, God\u2019s great hand will subdue Belial and all the angels of his dominion and all the men of his lot\u201d (1QM 1.14) by supernatural means. It is during the seventh lot, that \u201cthe mighty hand of God is raised against Belial and against all the army of his dominion for an everlasting blow \u2026 the sons of Japhet shall fall without rising; the Kittim shall be crushed without [remain] \u2026 when the hand of the God of Israel is raised against the whole horde of Belial\u201d (1QM 18.1\u20133). The newly published fragments clarify that the allusion to Exodus 14 is no literary flourish. The War Scroll states that the seventh round of battle will see Israel chasing after the Kittim, but the sons of light will have to give up the chase \u201cwhen the sun travels toward its setting on that day\u201d (18.5). Instead, they will return to their camp, \u201con that night to rest until the morning. And in the morning they shall go out to the place of the line\u201d where they will see God\u2019s miraculous intervention, as \u201cthe heroes of the Kittim, the horde of Assyria and the army of all the peoples that had gathered together, (to see) whether the slain \u2026 had fallen there by God\u2019s sword\u201d (1QM 19.9\u201311). How, then, will the words of Exodus 14 be fulfilled\u2014\u201cIsrael saw the Egyptians dead on the seashore. Israel saw the great work that the Lord did against the Egyptians\u201d (Ex. 14:30\u201331)? Now it becomes clear that in the final redemption as well the sea plays an important role (though of course not the Red Sea). The dearth of texts on this matter makes it impossible to determine whether the \u201cnaval\u201d stage occurs before or after the death of the Kittim by God\u2019s sword, or perhaps it is one and the same, and Israel will again see their enemies \u201cdead on the seashore.\u201d In any event, the Prince of the Congregation, the Messiah from the lineage of David, plays a decisive role here: he will come \u201cas far as the great sea\u201d; then the enemy forces \u201cwill flee from Israel\u201d (fragment 4). In all probability the next statement, \u201cthey shall return to dry land,\u201d refers to Israel. Then the fleeing wicked king will be seized and \u201cthey shall bring him before the Prince of the Congregation.\u201d He will be judged \u201cand the Prince of the Congregation will kill him.\u201d The fact that the king escapes the wrathful events does not detract from the parallel with Egypt, as there are those that hold that Pharaoh did not die in the Red Sea.<br \/>\nThe discussion thus far suggests that the few extant fragments from the War Rule continue the narrative of the War Scroll, recounting the events of the part of 1QM that did not survive. The details of these events remain unclear, but we can reconstruct them to a certain extent using two other Jewish apocalyptic works that have preserved the same tradition concerning the eschatological end of the wicked king. The first is the (Syriac) Apocalypse of Baruch. It is possible that one of the roots of the apocalyptic tradition preserved in this text reaches back to an interpretation of Isaiah 10:34, in which \u201cLebanon by a majestic one will fall\u201d is understood as a reference to the victory of Israel\u2019s messiah over the wicked king. Chapter 36 recounts the vision of the forest, which is said to be swept away by a fountain (which is identified as the messianic kingdom in 39.7), with only one cedar remaining. But ultimately this cedar too will be consumed by fire. Chapter 40 explores the symbolic meaning of this cedar, which is as follows:<\/p>\n<p>The last ruler who is left alive at that time will be bound, whereas the entire host will be destroyed. And they will carry him on Mount Zion, and my Anointed One will convict him of all his wicked deeds, and will assemble and set before him all the works of his hosts. And after these things he will kill him.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch preserves the same story as we find in the small fragments of the War Rule: following the destruction of his armies in the end of days, the wicked king manages to escape, but is ultimately brought before the messiah of Israel, who tries him and sentences him to death.<br \/>\nBefore turning to the second apocalyptic source, another examination of the War Scroll\u2019s description may be in order. As noted, in the final round of the Kittim war, they come to a supernatural end: \u201cThen Assyria shall fall by a sword, not of mortals.\u201d The armies of the sons of light witness God\u2019s miraculous intervention: \u201cthe heroes of the Kittim, the horde of Assyria and the army of all the peoples that had gathered together, (to see) whether the slain \u2026 had fallen there by God\u2019s sword\u201d (1QM 19.9\u201311). The special orthography of \u2018God\u2019s sword\u2019\u2014written as a single Hebrew word, \u05d7\u05e8\u05d1\u05d0\u05dc\u2014suggests we are dealing with a mythological object. According to the War Scroll, God\u2019s sword will act on its own; in Jewish apocalyptic sources outside of Qumran, the sword is wielded by Israel. 1 Enoch, which was written in the days of Judah Maccabee, teaches that in the end of days Israel will be given a great sword, which they will use in their battles against the nations; the sword will then be returned to the Temple (1 Enoch 90.34). The third book of the Sibylline Oracles (781\u2013782) tells that the prophets will be entrusted with the sword when eternal peace reigns. Of particular importance is the account in the Oracles of Hystaspes, which discusses the sword within a context that is much closer to the narrative in the War Rule than is the Apocalypse of Baruch.<br \/>\nThe Oracles of Hystaspes is a Jewish apocalyptic work whose hero is, supposedly, a prominent figure in the Persian religious tradition. It was composed prior to the destruction of the Second Temple, at some point after the establishment of the Maccabean dynasty, as the influence of the Book of Daniel is apparent. In his Divinae Institutiones, the church father Lactantius provides a detailed analysis of the oracles of Hystaspes (Book VII, from the end of chapter 15 through chapter 19). Here we find a description of a sword descending from heaven at midnight on Passover eve. This serves to announce to the righteous, that is, Israel, that the messiah is soon to arrive and lead the holy armies\u2014descending accompanied by angels and before him a flaming sword. Lactantius\u2019 survey does not fully clarify what role the sword will play in destroying the armies of wickedness. It is clear, however, that just like the War Rule (and 2 Baruch 40.1), Hystaspes prophesies that the wicked king will survive the destruction of his armies, but will lose all his power. According to all three sources, he will be captured and brought before the messiah, who will \u201cconvict him of his wicked deeds \u2026 and kill him.\u201d Both the Oracles of Hystaspes and 2 Baruch describe the messiah\u2019s rebuke of the imprisoned king, an element that is not found in the extant fragments of the Qumran War Rule. And none of the sources speak of the manner in which the king is executed. Lactantius\u2019 Epitome, however, states that the wicked king will be burned along with his fellow criminals, though this may be the product of the author\u2019s imagination. It is also possible that the Epitome is influenced by the Apocalypse of John 19:19\u201321. I have shown elsewhere that one of the sources of the Apocalypse of John is the Oracles of Hystaspes. In that study, I assumed that the author of the Apocalypse of John received the figure of the false prophet from the Jewish text. But now we find that according to the Apocalypse of John, the kings of the land and their armies gather to fight against the messiah and his army, but \u201cthe beast was captured, and with it the false prophet \u2026 [and] these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with sulfur. And the rest were killed \u2026\u201d (Rev 19:19\u201321). If this is another reflection of the Oracles of Hystaspes, it would provide additional support to the notion that these oracles described the wicked king\u2019s execution by fire.<br \/>\nMore important still is the fact that the Qumran writings, 2 Baruch, and the Oracles of Hystaspes all recount that the armies of the wicked king will be destroyed and only then will he be captured, brought before the messiah-king, tried and executed. It is unclear what verses (or other considerations) contributed to the formation of this ancient apocalyptic tradition. Another striking similarity is the appearance of God\u2019s sword in both the Qumran War Scroll and the Oracles of Hystaspes\u2014albeit in a different sense.<br \/>\nAnother striking affinity between the War Scroll and the Oracles of Hystaspes involves the order of events. The oracles teach that, following the destruction of his armies, the wicked king will escape and renew the war. After several rounds of fighting, he will be decisively defeated in the fourth battle. Then all the wicked will be annihilated, and the wicked king himself fall captive and be executed by the messiah. Hystaspes\u2019 order of events is not identical with that of the War Scroll, but it is so similar that we can use the detailed account of the latter to understand the details of Hystaspes. The Oracles of Hystaspes tell of Israel\u2019s first great victory, followed by four additional rounds, for a total of five rounds of battle. It appears that on Hystaspes\u2019 account, these will involve intermittent defeats and victories for Israel. A similar picture emerges from the War Scroll, though here we find seven rounds, not five, and they are called \u2018lots\u2019: \u201cAnd on the day of their war against the Kittim \u2026 the sons of light will be the strongest during three lots, in order to strike down wickedness; and in three (others), the army of Belial will gird themselves in order to force the lot of light to retreat. There will be infantry battalions to melt the heart, but God\u2019s might will strengthen the heart of the sons of light. And in the seventh lot, God\u2019s great hand will subdue \u2026\u201d (1QM 1.12\u201314). Both apocalypses, then, have Israel victorious in the first battle and the number of total rounds is odd\u2014a fact that guarantees Israel\u2019s ultimate victory. It appears that the War Scroll locates the sequence of the wicked king\u2019s escape, capture, and execution, following the final victory, while Hystaspes (according to Lactantius) has the king escaping after the first defeat, but being captured and executed only after his final defeat.<br \/>\nWe find, then, that despite differences in detail, we are dealing with a single apocalyptic tradition involving the death of the wicked king, shared by the War Scroll, 2 Baruch, and the Oracles of Hystaspes. The relevant motifs may be summarized in the following chart:<\/p>\n<p>Baruch<br \/>\nHystaspes<br \/>\nQumran<br \/>\nGod\u2019s Sword<br \/>\n\u2014<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nRounds of War<br \/>\n\u2014<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nDestruction of the Wicked King<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nFlight of the Wicked King<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nBrought Before the Messiah<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nMessiah Prosecutes King<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nNot Extant<br \/>\nExecution of Wicked King<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<br \/>\nX<\/p>\n<p>The striking resemblance between our three sources leads to the conclusion that this is a distinct apocalyptic tradition that has been largely forgotten. At the same time, it should be noted that 2 Baruch does not include God\u2019s sword, and that the sword plays a different role in Hystaspes and the War Scroll\u2014the latter describing the ultimate defeat of the armies of evil as an act of divine intervention, much like the destruction of the army of Sennacherib or the Egyptians at the Red Sea. It is also apparent that the Qumran account is closer to the Oracles of Hystaspes than to 2 Baruch. Now, in principle one might suppose that the Qumran texts were influenced by the Oracles of Hystaspes, but there are substantive differences between the two, and so it is more likely that we are dealing with a common source, one that also gave rise to the description in 2 Baruch. An additional conclusion is that the fragments of the War Rule preserve the continuation of the War Scroll, not a parallel account.<br \/>\nThe poor condition of many of the Qumran scrolls has forced us to travel a difficult and circuitous route to our destination, and even so many of the details surrounding the eschatological death of the wicked king\u2014the Antichrist in Christian traditions\u2014remain obscure. In reconstructing the apocalyptic narrative we have been greatly aided by two ancient Jewish works: the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch, and the Oracles of Hystaspes. Like the War Scroll from Qumran, both these texts present visions of eschatological redemption, and employ the same Jewish apocalyptic tradition as we find in the War Rule in describing the downfall of the wicked king. The present study, then, has yielded two results: we have gained new insights into the structure of the Qumran War Scroll, and uncovered a neglected chapter in the eschatological teachings of Second Temple Judaism.<\/p>\n<p>13.      A Comment on a Prayer for the Welfare of King Jonathan<\/p>\n<p>A Qumran fragment, 4Q448, has recently been published and discussed in Tarbiz. The fragment contains at least two distinct literary genres. The top section records remnants from the apocryphal Psalm 154, while the bottom contains a prayer for the welfare of King Jonathan, a clear reference to Alexander Jannaeus. The following are merely preliminary remarks, meant to supplement this important and fascinating publication. My comments are limited to the prayer for the welfare of King Jonathan.<br \/>\nThe remains of the prayer are preserved on columns 2 and 3 of the fragment. Column 2 is fully preserved, and though column 3 is incomplete, it clearly continues the prayer as Jonathan is mentioned on line 8. Here is the entire text of column 2:<\/p>\n<p>Arise, Holy One on behalf of King Jonathan, and the whole assembly of your people, Israel, who are in the four winds of heaven. May they all have peace. And on behalf of your kingdom may your name be blessed.<\/p>\n<p>As noted, there is no question that the King Jonathan in question is Alexander Jannaeus, who ruled over Israel from 103 to 76 B.C.E. A prayer for the welfare of this king would not have sat well with the Qumran community, though it was preserved on a scroll from its library. However, I think this contradiction may not be as great as it first appears. Today too one can find in various sectarian libraries books that are quite removed from the strict dogmatism of their adherents. Moreover, the fragmentary remains of the scroll do not correspond to the orthography and the language that characterize the distinctly sectarian compositions, so it may not have been copied by a Qumran scribe. This is a distinct possibility, as the Qumran Psalms scroll contains non-sectarian apocryphal psalms, including Psalm 154, parts of which are extant in our scroll. It appears, then, that hymnal poetry after the fashion of the Psalms was dear to the Qumran community, and this may be the reason the scroll was deposited in the Qumran library. It is possible that the librarian or scribe did not even note that the hero of the prayer\u2014King Jonathan\u2014was detested by the sect.<br \/>\nWhen was the prayer for the well-being of King Jonathan\u2014that is, Alexander Jannaeus\u2014composed? One suitable opportunity was the year 80 B.C.E. That was the year that Alexander Jannaeus returned home, after an uninterrupted series of victories and accomplishments. After three years of military campaigns, Alexander Jannaeus returned home and received an enthusiastic welcome from his people. It may be that this event is reflected in the prayer for the well-being of the king discovered in the Qumran library, or perhaps that this was the occasion of its composition.<br \/>\nThis would not be the first time that the Jewish people\u2019s sympathy for the heroic king would overcome its antipathy for the same cruel king. Thus, e.g., in circa 88 B.C.E., after Alexander Jannaeus suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Demetrius III of Syria, six thousand Jewish soldiers abandoned the Syrian army and enlisted with Jannaeus\u2019 forces, having taken pity on their defeated king. The prayer for the well-being of King Jonathan was obviously composed during his lifetime. Later, when the king lay on his deathbed, Jannaeus convinced his wife to reconcile with the Pharisees. And, indeed, a lavish funeral was held during which the Pharisees praised the deeds of the late king to the Jewish masses, claiming that Israel had lost a righteous king, thus causing the people to mourn his death. If so, despite the heavy shadow hanging over the biography of this king, Alexander Jannaeus did occasionally elicit sympathy in the hearts of his subjects. Thus, the most fitting date for the composition of the prayer for the well-being of King Jonathan is, as noted, 80 B.C.E.<br \/>\nThere is no question that the prayer for King Jonathan is not only fascinating in its own right, it meaningfully contributes to our understanding of the history of Jewish thought during the Hasmonean period. Referring to the Jewish people as a whole, the prayer speaks of \u201cthe whole assembly of your people, Israel, who are in the four winds of heaven.\u201d The phrase \u201cfour winds of heaven\u201d occurs in Zechariah 2:6 and Ezekiel 37:9 (\u201cfrom the four winds\u201d). Another relevant source for the present discussion is the early Christian work, Didache, composed circa 100 C.E. There (10.5) we find the very same language inserted into the Christian grace after meals: \u201cRemember, Lord, your community \u2026 and gather it from the four winds, into the kingdom that you have prepared for it.\u201d Here the Jewish hope for the ingathering of exiles has been transferred to the young Christian community (see also Didache 9.4). The same hope for complete Christian redemption finds its expression in the Gospel of Mark (13:27), which states: \u201cThen he will send out the angels, and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven\u201d (and see also Matt. 24:31).<br \/>\nThe prayer for the well-being of King Jonathan refers to the hope of an ingathering of exiles only obliquely. The prayer speaks of Jerusalem, the Holy City, on the one hand, and of the Jewish people as a whole\u2014\u201cthe whole assembly of your people, Israel, who are in the four winds of heaven\u201d\u2014on the other. There is a linkage between Jerusalem and the Jewish diaspora already in the epistle of Judah Maccabee, written shortly before the dedication of the Temple (2 Macc 1:1\u20132, 18), and preserved in 2 Maccabees, which was written by \u201cthe people in Jerusalem and in Judaea and the Council of the Elders and Judah\u201d and sent to \u201cthe Jews in Egypt\u201d (2 Macc. 1:10). The epistle seeks to include the Egyptian Jews in the celebration of Judah Maccabee\u2019s dedication of the Temple. He addresses them as follows:<\/p>\n<p>We write you inasmuch as we are about to celebrate the Purification. Please celebrate the days. God has saved His entire people and restored the heritage to us all, and also the kingdom and the priesthood and the sanctification, as He promised in the Torah. For we hope in God, that He will speedily have mercy on us and gather us together from the lands under the heavens to His holy Place, for He has indeed delivered us from great evils and has purified His Place. (2 Macc 2:16\u201318)<\/p>\n<p>This is not the place to discuss all the important aspects of Judah Maccabee\u2019s address, but it is worth noting that he asks the Jews of Egypt to participate in the celebration because he saw the purification of the Temple as a historic event for all Israel, throughout the Jewish diaspora: \u201cGod has saved His entire people and restored the heritage to us all.\u201d The salvation was not confined to Jerusalem or the Land of Israel, but a salvation of the entire people, including those living in the diaspora, e.g., in Egypt. The lot heritage of God belongs to the Jewish people as a whole, wherever they may be, and in the future God will \u201cgather us together from the lands under the heavens to His holy Place.\u201d<br \/>\nThe prayer for the well-being of King Jonathan indicates that the same ideological orientation found in the epistle of Judah Maccabee remained current in the days of Alexander Jannaeus, at least in the circles closest to the Hasmonean family. The prayer expresses not only the Maccabean ideology of inclusive Jewish nationhood, but (in keeping with the spirit of Judah Maccabee\u2019s epistle) mentions both Jerusalem as God\u2019s \u201choly Place\u201d and the diaspora, \u201cthe whole assembly of your people, Israel, who are in the four winds of heaven\u201d (though without mentioning the ingathering of exiles). To the best of my knowledge, there is no other ancient prayer that mentions the Jewish diaspora in such a simple and self-evident way. This is no coincidence. Following the establishment of the Maccabean dynasty, the ties between Israel and the diaspora were strengthened, thus fortifying the sense of Jewish national identity both in Israel and outside it.<\/p>\n<p>14.      The Roman Empire in Hasmonean and Essene Eyes<\/p>\n<p>To Yigael Yadin<br \/>\nRemota itaque iustitia quid<br \/>\nSunt regna nisi magna<br \/>\nLatrocinia? (Augustine, Civitas Dei 4.4)<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>The scholar of literature and art has the right, even the obligation, to judge the artistic merits of the works he discusses. The historian too is obliged to judge and evaluate, albeit in a different fashion. He must judge the moral quality of his written sources, and of the historical processes he encounters in his work. At the same time, his judgment must remain objective. If he fails to abide by both demands, he will not be a full-fledged historian. As a result, the material that he delves from the past will be a dead aggregate of facts, failing to demonstrate even the objective facts he wishes to uncover. But before the historian proceeds with an axiological analysis of the trends and forces at work in human history, he must first understand those groups with whom empathy is difficult\u2014be it in terms of their moral standing, the internal logic that guides them, or their ultimate utility. Such an understanding is prior to any evaluation, and must consider the circumstances of that historical era. After all, while those who thought as they thought and acted as they acted considered\u2014whether rightly or wrongly\u2014the circumstances of their day, they could not know the future with any certainty, and so could not foresee the shifting historical and political landscape, and the ultimate outcome of their actions and ideologies\u2014for better or for worse. The historian who seeks to draw conclusions from his work, must, then, provide a human-axiological assessment, while tracing the results of thoughts and actions in human history. This is not the place to discuss the practical use of good and evil in the life of the individual and of humanity; there are, of course, different views regarding this question. That said, there are undoubtedly many cases, both for individuals and throughout human history, where the absence of moral considerations, along with an inability to foresee future events, has been detrimental. The following study represents, I believe, an outstanding example of this phenomenon, drawn from Jewish history.<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>This is not the place to discuss the amazing historical phenomenon usually referred to by the general term \u2018imperialism.\u2019 This phenomenon has always had two aspects in all its historical manifestations: the relationship between the good and the monstrous in an empire that spans continents, depends both on the nature of the imperial idea and on its realization. There are huge empires of cruel conquest, while other empires play a positive role. Still, even the empires of the most enlightened cosmocrats contain frightening elements, particularly for those who are subject to their might.<br \/>\nThe Roman empire was the first to develop a positive ideology that seeks to explain\u2014with a fair degree of truth\u2014its important role in uniting the world under its rule, in terms of civilization, security, and peace. That said, there was also a negative aspect to the empire, and from the time of its imperial expansion on, there were those who hated it very much\u2014both among the nations that it fought, and those who suffered under its yoke. Throughout its existence, the Roman empire faced unceasing wars and rebellions against its expansion. The battle raged not only on the battlefield, but in the ideological arena as well. Against the pax Romana ideology of the empire was the anti-imperialist ideology\u2014and both camps had a basis for their claims.<br \/>\nThe earliest testimonies of an anti-Roman ideology appear in the beginning of the second century B.C.E., when the Seleucid king, Antiochus III\u2014the father of Antiochus Epiphanes and host to Rome\u2019s great enemy, Hannibal\u2014was defeated by Rome. In those days Rome faced east, but the move toward direct rule over the eastern Mediterranean was complicated, and did not come to fruition until many years later. The difficulty was not only one of amassing the necessary military strength, but also because in the early stages of the expansion east, the Roman empire did not have a clear goal, a clear purpose. Its leaders, like the ruling classes, entertained various and sometime contradictory notions as to the political goals of the eastern expansion. There was even some hesitation with regard to Greece, eliminated only when Greece as a whole came under Roman rule. Early on, the Romans sought local allies in Asia (and Egypt), including the Hasmonean dynasty. With time, however, they became more involved in the east and a growing number of eastern regions became Roman provinces. The Roman conquest of the east proceeded at a dramatically more rapid pace after Pompey\u2019s victory over Mithridates, the king of Pontus. This victory marked, inter alia, the end of the Seleucid kingdom. This period, 63 B.C.E., marks the beginning of a heavy-handed Roman intervention into Jewish affairs, as Jerusalem was conquered by Pompey. However, even after these conquests, the Romans focused on the Parthian danger, and allowed many of the vassal kingdoms to stand\u2014most important of which for the present discussion was Herod\u2019s kingdom. Apparently the Romans saw the existence of these kingdoms, dependent as they were on Rome\u2019s good will, as a buffer zone of sorts. However, over the course of the first century C.E., these kingdoms too became Roman provinces, a process that met with almost no active resistance on the part of the eastern population. The notable exception was the Jews, who maintained the memory of the independent Hasmonean dynasty, and whose Torah taught them to love freedom and hate the yoke of foreign rule. It is no coincidence that the Jewish resistance to Rome emerged as their land was becoming part of the Roman empire.<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>Ties between Israel and Rome were established during the reign of Judah Maccabee, who initiated the contact. However, Rome\u2019s rapacious and aggressive plans were known decades prior to that, during the reign of Antiochus the Great (III), and many an eastern heart yearned for vengeance against Rome, a feeling that found its expression in an ideology of hatred. Despite this, and despite the fact that Judah Maccabee was apparently aware of the dark and threatening side of Roman power, he did not consider this reason enough to forego the opportunity to establish ties with Rome. In those days, Rome had not yet conquered the east\u2014indeed, Israel was out of their reach and Rome was willing to play the role of a distant ally against the Hellenistic states. The situation was largely the same in the days of John Hyrcanus, during whose reign 1 Maccabees was composed, though the shadows cast by Rome had grown darker. Already in 145 B.C.E., well before the days of John Hyrcanus, the Roman army utterly razed Corinth. Three years prior, the Roman province of Macedonia was established, and Roman customs officials diluted the indigenous population of Bithynia in Asia Minor, though it remained outside Roman direct rule. In 129 B.C.E., during the reign of John Hyrcanus, the Romans established a province, \u2018Asia,\u2019 heir to Pergamum, annexed the region of Caria, and included all of western Asia Minor and the adjoining isles. However, two events occurred following John Hyrcanus\u2019 reign that fortified Rome\u2019s power in the region: first, the war against Mithridates of Pontus resulted in Pompey\u2019s conquest of Jerusalem, and then, in the first century C.E., the Asian vassal kingdoms lost their questionable independence. It was this step that led to the zealots\u2019 revolts and to the great rebellion against Rome.<br \/>\nJudah Maccabee was not the only one to forge ties with the Romans; his Hasmonean successors maintained these ties and, indeed, fortified them. What was the Jewish populace\u2019s view of these diplomatic ties before John Hyrcanus? One possible indication is the \u2018declaration of independence\u2019 from the time of Simon, John Hyrcanus\u2019 father, found in 1 Maccabees (14:38\u201340). There we find the following in praise of Simon: \u201cKing Demetrius in view of all this has confirmed him as high priest and admitted him to the ranks of his Friends and conferred great distinction upon him; indeed, he heard that the Romans had given the Jews the title \u2018Friends and Allies\u2019 and that they had treated Simon\u2019s ambassadors with honor.\u201d There is no question that Demetrius II\u2019s treatment of the Jews was influenced by the renewal of their friendship with the Romans, and by the activity of the Jewish embassy in Rome. The relations with Rome are, then, noted in the \u2018declaration of independence\u2019 within the context of Demetrius\u2019 positive attitude toward the head of the Jewish state. In other words, Simon\u2019s ties with Rome are presented in this document as a critical step on the road to Israel\u2019s political independence.<br \/>\nJudah Maccabee strove for political independence from the outset. This approach finds expression in the epistle\u2014preserved in the opening chapters of 2 Maccabees\u2014that he sent to the Jews of Egypt, during the preparations for the dedication of the temple. This is how he describes the political and religious condition of the Jews in Israel to their brethren in Egypt:<\/p>\n<p>As we said, we write you inasmuch as we are about to celebrate the Purification. Please celebrate the days. God has saved His entire people and restored the heritage to us all \u2026 also \u2026 the kingdom and the priesthood and the sanctification, as He promised in the Torah. For we hope in God, that He will speedily have mercy upon us and gather us together from the lands under the heavens to His holy Place, for He has indeed delivered us from great evils and has purified His Place. (2 Macc. 2:16\u201318)<\/p>\n<p>Judah Maccabee\u2019s words provide an indirect vista into what he considered to be one of the main goals in purifying the temple. In stating that God has given the kingdom to his people, Judah is suggesting that, following the dedication of the temple, Israel has achieved partial independence. The desire for political independence guided Judah Maccabee\u2019s actions for the rest of his life. He saw that the Lord had saved Israel from great evils, but that the danger had not fully passed, and thus he turned to the Romans for support.<br \/>\nThere are, of course, many differences between Judah Maccabee and Alexander Jannaeus, both in terms of their character, and in terms of their actions. Analysis of the relevant sources clearly shows that these differences are not merely the result of differences in the character of the two Hasmonean leaders, but rather reflect a historic shift. Lack of evidence prevents us from surveying every step in the process that saw the shift from a religious-national war of liberation to a policy tantamount to the worship of the power and authority of \u201cthat family of men to whom it had been granted to be the agents of Israel\u2019s deliverance\u201d (1 Macc. 5:62). It is possible that there were individuals in the Hasmonean family who already adhered to a weaker version of this view at the outset of the rebellion\u2014the first seeds of a bitter harvest. There are some who suggest that the turning point was the death of Judah Maccabee and the policies of his brother, Jonathan. Changing circumstances brought the latter into a much more active engagement with the Seleucid kingdom, and he eventually was appointed to the high priesthood by the Hellenistic king. We have already noted the \u2018declaration of independence\u2019 granted Simon, Jonathan\u2019s brother and heir. There are scholars who argue that Simon is referred to in the document as \u201ccommander and prince of God\u2019s nation\u201d (1 Macc. 14:47). In any case, the original Hebrew version of 1 Maccabees was called \u05e1\u05e4\u05e8 \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea \u05e9\u05e8 \u05d1\u05e0\u05d9\u05be\u05d0\u05dc, \u2018The Book of the House of the Commander and Prince of God\u2019s Children.\u2019 This title already indicates a great admiration for the members of the Hasmonean dynasty. Moreover, already in the \u2018declaration of independence\u2019 we find that it was resolved \u201cby the Jews and the priests, that Simon be commander and high priest in perpetuity until a true prophet shall arise\u201d (1 Macc. 14:41). The double role of chief and high priest was given to Simon and to his sons after him, but with a proviso: it would continue \u201cuntil a true prophet shall arise\u201d\u2014a prophet who can decide the matter. Within the court of Simon\u2019s son, John Hyrcanus, there were those who argued that the proviso was annulled and that the Hasmonean rule was no longer temporary: John, the priest to God most high, who had been granted the ability to prophesy, united the three crowns in his person: the crown of kingship, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of prophecy. Now, John never dared to call himself \u2018king,\u2019 but his son, Aristobulus I, had no such compunctions, nor indeed did the rulers who succeeded him. John Hyrcanus himself ultimately shifted his allegiance to the Sadducee camp\u2014a fateful move for the Hasmonean dynasty\u2014and there is no need to discuss the problematic figure of his other son, Alexander Jannaeus. It is also difficult to view in a favorable light the forced conversion of the local Gentile population by these commanders of the sons of God. As for their policy of allying themselves with political and military might, one can only wonder whether Realpolitik usually represents the pragmatic path in politics. Be all that as it may, beginning with Judah Maccabee, through the days of John Hyrcanus, and down to Pompey\u2019s calamitous conquest of Judah, there occurs a gradual shift within the Jewish leadership.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>This brief historical survey was necessary for understanding the ideological background to the praises heaped on Roman might in 1 Maccabees 8:1\u201316 as justification for the establishment of diplomatic ties between Judah Maccabee and Rome. The question presents itself as to whether the praises of Roman might in 1 Maccabees (cited in full below) were written during the time of Judah Maccabee, or at a later date, when the book was composed (by the hand of the author?). Careful analysis suggests the latter. For instance, the passage states that the Romans had reduced the Greeks to servitude \u201cdown to the present day\u201d (1 Macc. 8:10), suggesting the author lives after the death of Judah Maccabee. Moreover, the description reflects later stages of Greek servitude to the Romans. The inaccuracies regarding the world outside the borders of Israel, and especially the account of Roman imperial history, are no guarantee that the passage is early, since in other parts of the book as well we find that the authors knowledge of the outside world is rather limited. Thus, for instance, he believes that the Elam region is one of the cities of Persia (1.10).<br \/>\nThose scholars that argue that 1 Maccabees was composed during the reign of John Hyrcanus are undoubtedly correct, as the conclusion of the book clearly indicates (and it is hard to imagine that it was written after his death). \u2018The Book of the House of the Commander and Prince of God\u2019s Children,\u2019 as it was called, reflects a great admiration for the Hasmonean dynasty and its rulers. This admiration, alongside the praises of Roman power, demonstrates the author\u2019s fondness for military and political might. A very different spiritual environment is evident in another document that praises Roman might, namely Jonathan\u2019s epistle to the Spartans (1 Macc. 12:13\u201316). The letter states that John\u2019s emissaries will spend time in Sparta on their way to Rome, seeking to establish a friendship alliance with the Spartans. He writes: \u201cAs for us, many troubles and many wars have beset us, as the kings in our vicinity waged war upon us. Now, we did not wish to bother you or our other allies and friends with these wars, for we have the help of Heaven coming to our aid, so that we have been saved from our enemies and our enemies have been brought low.\u201d These words are similar in spirit to those of Judah Maccabee, Jonathan\u2019s brother, preserved in 2 Maccabees. There too (2 Macc. 2:16\u201318) Judah emphasizes the religious faith in \u201cGod, who saved His entire people and restored the heritage to us all \u2026 for He has indeed delivered us from great evils.\u201d Both epistles, then, are aware of the dangers hanging over Israel, but nonetheless note their faith in God.<br \/>\nIt appears the atmosphere in the Hasmonean court changed, as it is clear that the author of 1 Maccabees comes from the circles of John, priest of God most high. As it happens, this Hasmonean ruler ultimately joined the Sadducee camp\u2014a shift brought about, no doubt, by more than just theological considerations. According to the Essene sources, the Sadducee forces included a number of \u201cmighty warriors\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.11), as indeed we know of the military leaders of Alexander Jannaeus, the Sadducee king and son of John Hyrcanus. A number of these military figures would go on to serve Aristobulus and Alexander Jannaeus. Who knows if it was not a cold assessment of the military and political utility of the Sadducee officers\u2014utility both for the Jewish state and for its ruler\u2014that caused John Hyrcanus to turn his back on the Pharisees and transfer his allegiance to the Sadducees?<br \/>\nIt is difficult to establish with any degree of certitude that the author of 1 Maccabees\u2014a confidant of the Hasmonean dynasty\u2014was a Sadducee, but it is certainly clear that he was no Pharisee. This becomes clear from the marked omission\u2014relative, in any case, to 2 Maccabees\u2014of any mention of the resurrection of the dead or life everlasting, though the narrative materials, which include stories of bravery and death, certainly lend themselves to such discussions. Like his predecessor, Ben Sira, our author speaks only of eternal glory, not of life after death. Thus, just prior to his death, Mattathias turns to his sons and says: \u201cRemember the deeds of our ancestors, which they did in their generations, and win for yourselves great glory and undying renown\u201d (1 Macc. 2:51). Later in the same chapter he adds: \u201cHave no fear of the words of a wicked man, for his glory is destined for dunghills and worms. He will spring up today, but tomorrow he shall not be found, for he shall have turned back into dust, and his plotting shall perish\u201d (1 Macc. 2:62\u201363). The phrase \u201cundying renown\u201d is repeated in the description of how Simon, following Jonathan\u2019s death, constructs a glorious monument over the family graves \u201cfor undying renown\u201d (13:29). Similarly we find the phrase \u201cforever shall his memory be blessed\u201d (3:7) in praise of Judah Maccabee.<br \/>\nWe find, then, that the author avoids speaking of eternal life, even though the narrative content invites him to do so: the honor of the wicked perishes, while the righteous and the brave are heirs to eternal fame and honor. This approach is quite different from that of the Pharisees, situating him closer to the Sadducees and perhaps even identifying him as one of their adherents. At the end of the book (1 Macc. 16:23), the author refers to \u201cthe remainder of the history of John, his wars and his valorous deeds and his wall building and his other accomplishments.\u201d While this does not demonstrate that 1 Maccabees was written after the death of John Hyrcanus, it clearly antedates the first years of his reign. Gathering together all these elements, we find that the author of 1 Maccabees, who was associated with John Hyrcanus and his court, held opinions similar to those of the Sadducees, and composed the work toward the end of John Hyrcanus\u2019 rule. The book, then, gives voice to the changes in the Hasmonean court, to the conceptual shift whose roots are, to be sure, more ancient, but reaches its apex when the great leader, John the priest of God most high, now toward the end of his life, shifts his allegiance to the Sadducee camp. The book may also have been written slightly before this decisive event, when the processes leading up to it were in full swing. This dating may help explain the naked praise of Roman might expressed in 1 Maccabees, praise that is, to my knowledge, unique, and, removed from its historical context, not flattering to the character and goals of the Roman empire.<\/p>\n<p>V<\/p>\n<p>Here is the passage in 1 Maccabees that praises Rome:<\/p>\n<p>(1) Judas had heard about the Romans: that they were a great power who welcomed all who wished to join them and established ties of friendship with all who approached them. (2) As for their being a great power, Judas\u2019 informants told him of the Romans\u2019 valor in war: they had fought and conquered the Galatians and imposed tribute upon them. (3) They had fought in the land of Spain, conquering the silver and gold mines there. (4) They had conquered the whole region through their sagacity and perseverance, though it was large and far removed from Rome, and thus they had also overcome the kings who had come against them from remote quarters of the earth, defeating them heavily so that the survivors were still paying them annual tribute. (5) They had defeated in battle and conquered King Philip and King Perseus of the Macedonians, who had attacked them. (6) Even Antiochus the Great, King of Asia, was defeated by them when he went to war against them though he had one hundred and twenty elephants and cavalry and chariotry and a very large infantry force. (7) The Romans captured him alive and decreed that he and his successors on the throne should pay the Romans a heavy tribute and give hostages and be barred from the fairest of their domains, (8) the Indian land and Medea and Lydia. These domains the Romans took from him and gave to King Eumenes. (9) The Greeks of mainland Greece, too, had planned an expedition to destroy the Romans, (10) but when their plot became known to the Romans, they sent a single general against the Greeks and waged war on them, so that many of the Greeks fell slain, and the Romans took captive their wives and children, plundered their property, conquered their land, destroyed their fortresses, and reduced them to servitude down to the present day. (11) As for the remaining kingdoms and the islands, the Romans had reduced to ruin and servitude all who had ever opposed them. (12) With their friends, however, and with those who relied on them, the Romans had maintained their ties of friendship and had conquered the kings both near and far, and all those who heard of the Romans feared them. (13) Those whom they chose to aid to be kings, were kings; those whom they chose to, they deposed. Thus the Romans had risen to great heights of power. (14) Nevertheless, not one of them had sought self-glorification by putting on a diadem or wearing purple. (15) They had instituted a senate for themselves, in which every day three hundred twenty sat to deliberate continually over how to maintain the people\u2019s good order. (16) They entrusted their government and the ruling of all their territory to one man each year, everyone obeying him, without any envy or jealousy among themselves. (1 Macc. 8:1\u201316).<\/p>\n<p>This praise of the Romans is both unique and inherently problematic, although its author surely was not aware that most of the points in his survey may be interpreted as a criticism of Roman imperialism. For one thing, the absence of any mention of the Roman justice system is quite striking. Already at this time Rome saw this as one of the foundations of its empire, indeed one that foreign nations occasionally appreciated as well. The author only recounts\u2014with a number of historical errors\u2014the unity and discipline characteristic of the Roman regime, the absence of hubris on the part of its leaders, and that its senators meet daily for the good of the republic (vv 14\u201315). The absence of any reference to the Roman justice system is particularly marked in light of statements such as: \u201cThose whom they chose to aid to be kings, were kings; those whom they chose to, they deposed. Thus the Romans had risen to great heights of power\u201d (13). True, the author notes that the impetus for Roman conquest occasionally came as a response to an outside attack, as Rome was attacked by kings from the world over (3\u201311). But this \u2018justification\u2019 is not mentioned with regard to the Galatians (2), or the conquest of Spain (3)\u2014where the Romans are said to have conquered \u201cthe silver and gold mines there.\u201d Similarly, the author repeatedly notes the heavy taxes imposed by Rome on the vanquished nations (vv. 2, 4, 7). As far as the author is concerned, the Roman conquest is the result of their great military might, but at the same time \u201cthey had conquered the whole region through their sagacity and perseverance\u201d (4). Through might and sagacity, they succeed in conquering regions very distant from their homeland, looting the conquered lands, destroying their fortifications, capturing the women and children, and enslaving the residents. In short, all who hear of them are afraid (12). But let not the Hasmonean rulers fear Roman expansion! To the contrary: Judah Maccabee was right to forge a treaty of friendship with them, and his heirs are wise to maintain it. For the Romans possess a redeeming quality: the power they use to vanquish many nations is not turned against their allies. Indeed, their friends can count on Roman fidelity: \u201cthey were a great power who welcomed all who wished to join them and established ties of friendship with all who approached them (1) \u2026 [w]ith their friends, however, and with those who relied on them, the Romans had maintained their ties of friendship\u201d (12). It appears, then, that Roman propaganda had succeeded in establishing this image in the Hasmonean court at the time that 1 Maccabees was composed. Already in the days of Judah Maccabee, however, this image was dubious. It is more questionable still if the book was indeed composed in the latter years of John Hyrcanus, when he had turned to the spiritual and political world of the Sadducees. Indeed, the appreciation of force on the domestic front led to blind admiration of the unfettered power of the Roman ally. The author, however, could not see the impending danger: when the time was right, i.e., after amassing the force needed for direct rule and other conditions having ripened, Rome would abandon its Jewish allies. For naught will \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem accumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations,\u201d for \u201cin the last days their riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 9.4\u20137; see also Pesher Nahum 1.11\u201312). This is precisely what happened in 63 B.C.E., during the reign of Pompey. The Sadducee circles within the Hasmonean court were dealt a deadly blow. If in the days of John Hyrcanus the author of the encomium to Rome admired their victory over Greece, during which \u201cmany of the Greeks fell slain, and the Romans took captive their wives and children,\u201d now the shoe was on the other foot. It is of the house of Aristobulus II and his followers that it is said, \u201chis women, his children and his babies will go into captivity, his warriors and his honored ones [will perish] by the sword\u201d (Pesher Nahum 4.4). These tragic results reveal the dangers inherent in blind admiration for the might of the evil kingdom, casting a dark shadow over 1 Maccabees\u2019 praises of Rome.<\/p>\n<p>VI<\/p>\n<p>A great scholar long ago noted the similarity between the encomium to Rome in 1 Maccabees 8:1\u201316, and the description of the Kittim in Pesher Habakkuk. As in all the Qumran pesharim, the Kittim of Pesher Habakkuk are undoubtedly the Romans. He writes:<\/p>\n<p>The pesher\u2019s account of the Kittim reads as a forceful protest on the part of the author against the policy of the Maccabees, from Judah to John Hyrcanus, who sought the love and protection of the Roman conquerors against the Seleucid rulers in Syria. The members of the Yahad, the Qumran community, who were enemies of the Hasmonean dynasty, give voice in this interpretation of Habakkuk to the hatred they felt toward the Roman-Hasmonean alliance.\u2026 Habakkuk\u2019s words about the cruel Assyrians they applied to the Kittim-Romans, thereby hinting that these allies of the Hasmoneans will soon raze Judah, just as the Assyrians destroyed Judah and burned the Temple.\u2026 This description, that is diametrically opposed to that of 1 Maccabees, is also based on hearsay\u2014hearsay that has been greatly exaggerated for the worse.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that this scholar is right on most counts; however, I question whether the words of Pesher Habakkuk were intended as a protest against the friendship alliance between the Hasmoneans and Rome. The passage certainly makes no mention of such a protest. There is, however, an explicit attack on Roman imperialism as cruel and rapacious. It is hard to imagine that the author of Pesher Habakkuk was familiar with 1 Maccabees and engaged it in a polemic. We find, then, surprisingly similar descriptions of Rome, but through opposing lenses, since 1 Maccabees admires the might of Rome, while the Essene author abhors it and sees in it a threat to Israel. Indeed, he foresees future events when he writes that \u201ctheir riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 9.4\u20136), for it appears these words were written prior to Pompey\u2019s conquests, that is, prior to the realization of the Roman threat. That said, Pesher Habakkuk was most likely not written during the time of John Hyrcanus himself, and should be located several decades after the admirer of John Hyrcanus so lauded Roman might in 1 Maccabees.<br \/>\nLet us now cite the Pesher Habakkuk passages dealing with the Kittim-Romans, in order, keeping in mind that the order is not a product of the author\u2019s argument, but rather determined by the order of the prophet\u2019s verses. For our part, we will not explore the interpretive practices of Pesher Habakkuk, nor indeed the scroll\u2019s concern with other historical events of the time supposedly alluded to in Habakkuk\u2019s prophecy, but rather focus on the resulting portrait of Rome. Here are the relevant statements:<\/p>\n<p>Its interpretation concerns the Kittim who are swift and powerful in battle, to slay many [\u2026] in the kingdom of the Kittim; they will take rule [many countries] and will not believe in the precepts of [Go]d (2.12\u201315) \u2026 the Kittim, the fear and dread of whom are on all the peoples; all their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations (3.4\u20136) \u2026 the Kittim, who trample the land with their horses and their animals and come from far off, from the islands of the sea, to devour all the nations, like an eagle, insatiable. With fury they are heated and with burning wrath and livid faces they will speak to all the nations (3.9\u201313) \u2026 they deride the powerful and despise the honored men; at kings and princes they jeer, and sneer at a huge nation (4.2\u20133) \u2026 the leaders of the Kittim despise the fortresses of the peoples and with derision laugh at them, they surround them with a huge army to capture them. And through dread and fear they surrender into their hands, and they demolish them because of the wickedness of those who dwell in them (4.5\u20139) \u2026 the leaders of the Kittim who on the advice of a house of the guilty go by, one before the other. Their leaders, one after another, will come to raze the earth (4.10\u201313) \u2026 the Kittim gather their wealth with all their loot like fish of the sea. And what it says: \u201cTherefore he sacrifices to his net and makes offerings to his seine\u201d (Hab. 1:16) Its interpretation: they offer sacrifices to their standards and their weapons are the object of their worship (6.1\u20135) \u2026 they distribute their yoke and their burden, which is their food, among all the peoples, year after year, ravaging many countries (6.6\u20138) \u2026 the Kittim will cause many people to die by the end of the sword, youths, adults and old people, women and children; not even children at the breast will they pity (6.10\u201312)<\/p>\n<p>What we have here is a severe critique of the Romans, and their cruel methods of attaining world domination. The Romans who come to devour all nations will not abide by the laws of God. And yet, this very dark portrait\u2014critically important to the history of the hatred toward the Roman conquerors-destroyers\u2014is strikingly similar to the praises of Rome sung in 1 Maccabees. Here are some of the more apparent parallels:<\/p>\n<p>1 Maccabees 8<br \/>\nPesher Habakkuk<br \/>\n1\u20132: they were a great power \u2026 valor in war<br \/>\n2.12\u201313: the Kittim who are swift and powerful in battle<br \/>\n4: They had conquered the whole region through their sagacity and perseverance<br \/>\n3.5\u20136: all their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations<br \/>\n4: it was large and far removed<br \/>\n3.10\u201311: [they] come from far off, from the islands of the sea<br \/>\n4: the survivors were still paying them annual tribute (and see also vv. 2 and 7)<br \/>\n6.6\u20138: they distribute their yoke and their burden, which is their food, among all the peoples, year after year, ravaging many countries<br \/>\n10: the Romans took captive their wives and children, plundered their property<br \/>\n6.10\u201311: the Kittim will cause many people to die by the end of the sword, youths, adults and old people, women and children; not even children at the breast will they pity<br \/>\n10: \u2026 destroyed their fortresses<br \/>\n4.5\u20136: the leaders of the Kittim despise the fortresses of the peoples<br \/>\n12: [they] conquered the kings both near and far<br \/>\n4.2\u20133: they deride the powerful and despise the honored men; at kings and princes they jeer, and sneer at a huge nation<br \/>\n12: and all those who heard of the Romans feared them<br \/>\n3.4\u20135: the Kittim, the fear and dread of whom are on all the peoples<br \/>\n4.7\u20138: And through dread and fear they surrender into their hands<br \/>\n15: They had instituted a senate for themselves<br \/>\n16: They entrusted their government and the ruling of all their territory to one man each year<br \/>\n4.10\u201313: the leaders of the Kittim who on the advice of a house of the guilty go by, one before the other. Their leaders, one after another, will come to raze the earth<\/p>\n<p>Despite the polar opposition in their overall tone, the two descriptions of Roman might are very similar in detail. Of course, this similarity may be attributed to their addressing the very same historical phenomena. And yet, we must not overlook the different interpretations offered to parallel phenomena. For instance, it is clear that the Essene author, who deeply opposes Roman might and cunning, cannot compliment Rome for its ability to vanquish kingdoms near and far, while maintaining love and friendship with those that rely on it (1 Macc. 8:12). Similarly, the view that Roman policy is founded on law and justice\u2014a view shared by a number of foreign nations\u2014is not mentioned in Pesher Nahum, nor, as noted, in 1 Maccabees. Indeed, the Essene author not only rejects the notion that Rome is based on law and justice, he holds that they persecute many nations and \u201cwill not believe the precepts of God\u201d (1QpHab 2.14\u201315). The two authors recognize the Romans\u2019 cunning use of negotiations in the service of their imperial expansion, but cast it in a completely different light! 1 Maccabees states that the Romans conquered \u201cthe whole region through their sagacity and perseverance\u201d (1 Macc. 8:4), while the Essene author argues that \u201call their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations\u201d (1QpHab 3.5\u20136). Not only does he take Rome to task for its scheming as it sets out on additional conquests, he adds that \u201cwith fury they are heated, and with burning wrath and livid faces they will speak to all the nations\u201d (1QpHab 3.12\u201313) and \u201c\u2026 they deride the powerful and despise the honored men; at kings and princes they jeer, and sneer at a huge nation\u201d (1QpHab 4.1\u20133). Here we can make out the distant echoes of the Roman emissaries, and their brutal behavior in negotiating with national leaders.<br \/>\nRoman conquest and domination often involved acts of cruelty, which Pesher Nahum describes with no small revulsion: \u201c[T]he Kittim will cause many to die by the edge of the sword, youths, adults and old people, women and children; not even children at the breast will they pity\u201d (1QpHab 6.10\u201311). The author of 1 Maccabees knows of such events as well, but he recounts them without aversion: the Romans act thus in retaliation. Thus, when the Greeks \u201chad planned an expedition to destroy the Romans,\u201d the latter learned of the plot and \u201cmany of the Greeks fell slain, and the Romans took captive their wives and children \u2026 and reduced them to servitude down to the present day\u201d (1 Macc. 8:9\u201310). The author goes on to describe how the Romans destroyed the Greek fortresses, a motif that appears in Pesher Habakkuk, but in a ghastly context: \u201c[T]he leaders of the Kittim despise the fortresses of the peoples and with derision laugh at them, they surround them with a huge army to capture them. And through dread and fear they surrender into their hands, and they demolish them because of the wickedness of those who dwell in them\u201d (1QpHab 4.5\u20139). The Pesher presents us here with a full description of Roman military aggression, based on the allusion in Habakkuk 1:10 (\u201cThey laugh at every fortress\u201d). Inter alia, he describes from a particularly Jewish point of view, why the Romans are allowed to conquer the fortresses of the nations (referring, no doubt, to fortified cities as well): they surround the fortresses with \u201ca huge army\u201d and destroy them \u201cbecause of the wickedness of those who dwell in them.\u201d He even states that these sites fall to the Romans \u201cthrough dread and fear.\u201d Elsewhere Pesher Habakkuk states generally that the \u201cfear and dread\u201d of the Kittim are on \u201call people.\u201d 1 Maccabees also knows that the world is terrified of Rome: the Romans \u201chad conquered the kings both near and far, and all those who heard of the Romans feared them\u201d (1 Macc. 8:12). But while the author of 1 Maccabees reports that there is fear from the unfettered power of Rome, he himself feels no such qualms. To the contrary: the great might of Rome strikes fear in the hearts of those who hear of the empire, but Rome\u2019s allies stand to gain from its power, as they are \u201ctheir friends \u2026 those who relied on them\u201d (1 Macc. 8:12).<br \/>\nRome\u2019s greed, particularly with regard to the heavy taxes it imposed, was well known. 1 Maccabees mentions the Roman taxes three times in the course of the passage (vv. 2, 4, and 7): once in connection with the victory over the Galatians; a second time in more general terms, as the result of Rome\u2019s victory over \u201cthe kings who had come against them from remote quarters of the earth\u201d; and a third time as punishment meted out to Antiochus III after his defeat. The author does not decry Rome\u2019s greed in the least; indeed, he speaks admiringly of the brave battles waged by the Romans who defeated Spain, \u201cconquering the silver and gold mines there\u201d (1 Macc. 8:3). Our Essene author takes a very different view of the economic destruction and heavy taxation visited upon the nations that fall before Rome. The Romans \u201cdistribute their yoke and their burden, which is their food, among all the peoples, year after year, ravaging many countries\u201d (1 QpHab 6.6\u20138); they \u201ctrample the land with their horses and their animals and come from far off, from the islands of the sea, to devour all the nations, like an eagle, insatiable\u201d (1 QpHab 3.9\u201312). The Roman forces \u201cgather their wealth with all their loot like fish of the sea\u201d (1QpHab 6.1\u20132), while the provincial rulers \u201cone after another, will come to raze the earth\u201d (1QpHab 4.12\u201313).<br \/>\nOne author looks on in admiration, the other in horror! And despite this difference, the two accounts agree on so many details that it is possible to take whole passages from one and transfer them smoothly to the other. The author of 1 Maccabees would undoubtedly agree to include in his description of Roman might sentences such as: \u201c[they] are swift and powerful in battle\u201d (1QpHab 2.12); \u201cthe fear and dread of [them] are on all the people\u201d (3.4\u20135); \u201c[they] trample the land with their horses and their animals and come from far off, from the islands of the sea, to devour all the nations\u201d (3.9\u201311). Similarly he would agree with the view that the Roman leaders \u201cdespise the fortresses of the peoples and with derision laugh at them \u2026 and they demolish them\u201d (4.5\u20139), and that the Romans \u201cdistribute their yoke and their burden which is their food, among all the peoples, year after year\u201d (6.6\u20137). All these statements emphasize the might of Rome and contain a number of motifs that do, in fact, appear in 1 Maccabees. The author of Pesher Habakkuk, however, might agree with some of the statements in 1 Maccabees, but would see them as criticism. He might, for example, write that the Romans conquered \u201cthe whole region through their sagacity and perseverance\u201d (1 Macc. 8:4), and recognize that they defeated Spain for \u201cthe silver and gold mines there\u201d (1 Macc. 8:3)\u2014but all this only serves as proof of Rome\u2019s greed, and should be grouped together with the heavy yoke of Roman taxation (1 Macc. 8:2, 4, 7). In short, the author of Pesher Habakkuk would approve of most of 1 Maccabees\u2019 laudatory description of Roman might\u2014but with two important qualifications: the Romans are not loyal allies, and their attacks are not usually provoked by outside aggression (e.g., as when the Greeks planned \u201cto destroy\u201d them [1 Macc. 8:9]). The curious overlap between praise and blame is, in fact, only apparent. As noted, the same phenomena that the Essene author takes as evidence of Rome\u2019s mendacity, the Hasmonean author interprets as signs of its greatness. If the author of Pesher Habakkuk had known of 1 Maccabees\u2019 praise of the Romans, he would no doubt have seen it as an exemplary expression of the views of \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem, who will accumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations. However, in the last days their riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (1QpHab 9.4\u20137).<br \/>\nWe see, then, two one-sided views of Roman imperialism: the one, Essene, is blind to its positive aspects, since it serves as a manifest of sorts for the victims\u2014both actual and potential\u2014of Roman power. 1 Maccabees too, for all its praise, omits the truly positive traits of the Roman empire, e.g., the rule of law and the pax Romana. Instead it cites Rome\u2019s egalitarian regime that looks after the needs of its subjects without hubris (1 Macc. 8:14\u201316). As for Rome\u2019s loyalty to its allies (1 Macc. 8:1, 12)\u2014this was largely a fa\u00e7ade put on by Rome so as to further its imperial ambitions; what succor they provided their friends was motivated by Roman self-interest. Pesher Habakkuk, 1 Maccabees, and the history of the period all indicate that Rome\u2019s goal was almost always to expand its conquests: \u201call their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations\u201d (1QpHab 3.5\u20136). The Hasmonean author presents other Roman qualities as positive: they are ruthlessly efficient in battle, destroy very distant nations, conquer many lands, raze fortified sites, capture women and children, enslave the vanquished and impose onerous taxes, and appropriate the conquered nations\u2019 wealth and resources. Rome crowns and deposes kings as it sees fit, casting fear and dread into the hearts of all who hear of their deeds. To be sure, this is faint praise indeed, and we have shown that the Essene author cites very similar descriptions as a mark of Rome\u2019s shame.<br \/>\nRome is not a unique case. Throughout history, the terrifying might of a great and seemingly invincible empire has elicited wonder in many people, especially rulers (and their immediate circles) who viewed a policy based on power as their only true support. So long as the empire\u2019s might was seen as working in their favor, the rulers supported imperial brutality. True, the author of 1 Maccabees attributes to Judah Maccabee a very different view, when he attributes to him the following oration: \u201cIt is easy for the many to be delivered into the hands of few. Heaven sees no difference in gaining victory through many or through a few, because victory in war does not lie in the weight of numbers, but rather strength comes from heaven\u201d (1 Macc. 3:18\u201321). But when the same author, giving voice to the political views of his historical context, addresses the political might of Rome, an empire conceived\u2014and this point is key\u2014as an ally to the Jews, he worships the might of the great empire. The description is, then, necessarily ambivalent: the author wishes to praise, but an attentive ear will hear in his words the very opposite. All the same, the praise of Roman power in 1 Maccabees is a precious and fascinating historical document, as it demonstrates that not all of Rome\u2019s admirers were influenced by Roman propaganda; there were those who were simply smitten with its imperial might. The Essene texts, including Pesher Habakkuk, are more important still: they represent a unique expression of the hatred toward Roman imperialism in the heart of those threatened by it.<\/p>\n<p>VII<\/p>\n<p>Essene anti-imperialism is, in and of itself, a complicated and even contradictory phenomenon, but one that is easily understood within its particular social context. The Essene ideology was fundamentally revolutionary and indeed\u2014to speak anachronistically\u2014\u2018socialist,\u2019 but at the same time apocalyptic. However, the Qumran community did not only expect a social and universal revolution that they would effect in the end of days with the aid of divine intervention. They began to implement some of these ideas in their daily life. They formed, after all, a distinct social organization, separate from the rest of the Jewish population. One of the best-known features of the community was its commitment to shared wealth, a policy that was in part due to the Essene valorization of poverty as a religious ideal: they were, to be sure, \u201cthe select of righteousness\u201d (\u05d1\u05d7\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9 \u05e6\u05d3\u05e7), but also \u201cpoor in spirit\u201d (\u05e2\u05e0\u05d9\u05d9 \u05e8\u05d5\u05d7) and \u201cpoor in grace\u201d (\u05d7\u05e1\u05d3 \u05d0\u05d1\u05d9\u05d5\u05e0\u05d9). The Essene author thanked God that \u201cYou have not placed my support in robbery, nor in wealth\u201d (1QHa 18.22\u201323). The community set itself apart from the wealth of the rapacious, hating \u201cthe men of the bending of the law, those who point the finger and speak evil and are keen on riches\u201d (1QS 11.2). They believed that wealth breeds moral corruption, as indeed happened to the Wicked Priest, who was one of the Hasmonean rulers, for the Wicked Priest<\/p>\n<p>was called loyal at the start of his office. However, when he ruled over Israel his heart became proud, he deserted God and betrayed the laws for the sake of riches. And he robbed and hoarded wealth from the violent men who had rebelled against God. And he seized public money, incurring additional serious sin. (1QpHab 8.8\u201312)<\/p>\n<p>The Essene opposition to all wealth that involves injustice was categorical. We saw above that the author of Pesher Habakkuk cries out against \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem, who will accumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations. However, in the last days their riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (1QpHab 9.4\u20137). And if the Essenes opposed ill-gotten riches in general, and looting from other nations, in particular, it is evident that they would be sensitive to the economic abuses visited upon other nations by the Romans, who \u201cgather their wealth with all their loot like fish of the sea\u201d (1QpHab 6.1\u20132).<br \/>\nIncidentally, like other revolutionary groups, the Essene opposition to capital was inconsistent. True, they referred to themselves as the poor and impoverished, but new members were required to contribute their personal wealth to the community coffers, and all were allowed to profit from their work. They could not, however, enter into partnership with people outside the community. Regarding \u201cthe goods of the men of holiness who walk in perfection, their goods must not be mixed with the goods of the men of deceit who have not cleansed their path to separate from injustice and walk in a perfect behavior\u201d (1QS 9.8\u20139). Not only did the community possess capital, the Manual of Discipline promises that \u201cmy soul shall not crave wealth by violence, nor shall I be involved in any dispute with the men of the pit until the day of vengeance\u201d (1QS 10.19). It appears, then, that the members of the Qumran community are enjoined not to accumulate wealth from the men of the pit only on a temporary basis; this will change on the eschatological day of judgment, with the outbreak of the war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness. Then the sons of light will conquer all of Israel, indeed all of the world, and then, \u201cthe congregation of his chosen ones \u2026 will be chiefs and princes over the whole people like shepherds among their flocks,\u201d for theirs is \u201cthe inheritance of the whole,\u201d and \u201cthey will inherit the high mountain of Israel and delight in his holy mountain\u201d (4Q171 [= 4QPsa] 3.5\u201311).<br \/>\nLike the resistance to wealth, there are problematic aspects to the famous Essene pacifism as well\u2014perhaps even more so. We have already seen that they are preparing themselves for the war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness, a war that will end with the conquest of the entire world, and the destruction of all the wicked. We may assume that as the day of judgment tarried, the Essenes did not wholly relinquish their expectations for vengeance. The Essene pacifism, then, was conditional: for the while, the Essene is commanded \u201ceverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit; to them he should leave goods and hand-made items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed to one domineering him,\u201d while at the same time remaining \u201centhusiastic for the decree and for its time, for the day of revenge\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201323). In this manner, the pacifist and aggressively anti-imperialist Essenes were able to submit to any imperial master, and even found common cause with the hated King Herod. Similar paradoxes occur in other pacifistic revolutionary groups, as well as a variety of religious sects and secular political movements. Still it should be noted that the Essene ideology\u2014whether understood as actively revolutionary, or as a conditional form of pacifism that preaches \u201ceverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit\u201d\u2014is classically anti-imperial through and through. It is no coincidence that the Essenes valorized poverty and opposed\u2014in a form of \u2018anti-capitalism\u2019\u2014the accumulation of wealth generally, and political rulers who \u201caccumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations\u201d in particular.<br \/>\nThe Essenes consciously sought out a coherent yet flexible worldview that set them apart from any other group in the ancient world. They are outstanding representatives of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition, which was based in no small part on a combination of anti-imperialism and fierce social critique. (One need only read the book of Revelation for proof). It would appear that the revolt against the corrupt norms of our world provides the main impetus for the formation of Jewish apocalypticism, and for similar movements in other nations. These fervent adherents of eschatological redemption hoped for the destruction of this evil world and the immediate advent of redemption. But they did not look only toward the eschaton. Sensing the crisis of their day, their historical senses grew sharp and over-eager and they widened their gaze beyond the present to the broader horizon of humanity\u2019s genesis and meaning and ultimate telos. They believed that theirs was a time of transition\u2014an end to the old era and the beginning of the new, and so they came to believe that history consists of a shifting sequence of eras. The Book of Daniel contains the doctrine of the four kingdoms, but this is not the only possible apocalyptic division of history. The overarching view of human history and its periodization are the outstanding achievements of apocalypticism. Through this critical issue, apocalyptic thought (and not biblical prophecy)\u2014with the Book of Daniel and the New Testament as conduits\u2014exercised a decisive influence on a wide range of historiographic systems, beginning with the Church Fathers and down to the present.<br \/>\nThe Essenes reached important theoretical and ideological conclusions from the existence of preordained historical periods, not least of which is their belief in predestination. More generally, the periodization of history is one of the keys to the Qumran community\u2019s worldview: every period requires its own distinct approach, an approach to be determined by what is revealed to the community. It was incumbent upon the Essenes, then, to \u201cfulfill the will of God in compliance with all revelation for every period, to acquire all the wisdom that has been gained according to the periods and the decree of the period\u201d (1QS 9.13\u201314). In other words, each individual Essene must constantly formulate a new position toward the events of his day. The members of the Qumran community were undoubtedly eager to gather information about the historical events affecting Israel and the world as a whole, in part due to their revolutionary and anti-imperialist orientation, with its aversion to repression and injustice. Their lively interest in political and social developments marks them as important witnesses to the internal clashes within the Jewish people, as well as the power struggles between different nations. This information finds its way into the Essene pesharim, which thus become an important and even unique tool for the historical study of the era. Through the Essenes\u2019 firm and unwavering anti-imperialist position, the pesharim convey to us not only the voice of a Jewish sect, but the insistent protests of all the masses across the globe who suffered, or were at the risk of suffering, from Rome\u2019s conquests and aggression.<\/p>\n<p>VIII<\/p>\n<p>Pesher Habakkuk appears to have been composed while Israel was under serious threat from the Roman empire, but before its realization with Pompey\u2019s political intervention and military conquest of Jerusalem. Pesher Nahum, however, was written after this terrible trauma, and in it we find that the Essenes\u2014like the rest of the Jewish people\u2014hope that the wicked Roman regime will eventually pass away. Thus the Essene interpreter of Nahum 1:4 (\u201cHe rebukes the sea and makes it dry, and he dries up all the rivers\u201d) suggests that the first hemistich indicates God will \u201ccarry out judgment against them and eliminate them from the face of the earth,\u201d while the rivers refer to \u201ctheir chiefs, whose rule he will end\u201d (1QpNah, fragment 2, 2\u20135). Pesher Habakkuk, in contrast, makes no mention of the end of Rome, but rather looks toward a different historical event, namely that the wealth amassed by the last priests of Jerusalem will be given to the Romans (1QpHab 9.4\u20137). Pesher Habakkuk, then, concentrates on its hostile description of the Roman empire and of its conquests; aside from the one issue just cited, the scroll contains no specifically Jewish perspective on Rome. In this respect, Pesher Nahum may be seen as an uninterrupted series of the anti-Roman arguments dating from the first half of the first century B.C.E., and voiced across the globe by those threatened by Rome. The discovery of the pesher, then, provides us with another witness to the resistance toward\u2014and criticism of\u2014Rome.<br \/>\nThe great advantage of the Pesher is that it provides us with criticism of Rome directly from those formulating it. As Jewish history and the history of other nations teach, the opposition to Rome was not merely verbal and ideological, but at times quite active, in the form of rebellions and wars instigated by the conquered people. These actions were motivated by the hope that the Roman threat could be removed, its yoke tossed off, or perhaps outright destroyed. Needless to say, such hopes did not always lead to outright war and rebellion, and hatred for the Romans found expression in ideologies that were transmitted orally or in writing. Many a prophecy was sounded concerning the downfall of Rome among the nations it dominated from the east to the west. In addition, apocalyptic treatises were composed, fueled by the hope for revenge, announcing the downfall of Rome and redemption of its victims. However, these texts have not reached us directly. This was, after all, revolutionary literature, the samizdats of the day, and the reading or dissemination of such writings was prohibited; Augustus even commanded that two thousand such works be burned. It would appear that some non-Jewish prophecies against Rome are reflected in the Greek Sibylline Oracles, but in their final form these are Jewish-Christian works, so it is difficult to ascertain whether the gentile oracles are preserved in them \u201cas is\u201d or have undergone Jewish or Christian adaptation. It appears, then, that the only direct testimonies of opposition to the Roman empire, expressed by nations under Rome\u2019s rule and whose authenticity is not in question, are Jewish\u2014be they part of rabbinic literature or from other Jewish sources. Most of these sources crystallized after the destruction of the Second Temple, so that the pre-70 testimony of the Essene Pesharim\u2014including Pesher Habakkuk\u2014is of particular importance. Not only do they provide a context in which to examine the broader, non-Jewish resistance to Rome, they also shed light on the question, To what extent does the post-destruction hatred of Rome have its roots in earlier religious tendencies?<br \/>\nTo the direct and indirect evidence for Rome-hatred we may add one more literary genre. As early as the second century B.C.E. there is evidence that the Romans were aware of the universal ire they provoke. Cicero refers to \u201cthe almost justified hatred against our kingdom,\u201d on account of the rapacious behavior of the Roman provincial rulers. He goes on to say that the Roman people can no longer bear the tears, the moaning, and the complaints of all the other nations. Indeed, Roman history books provide information concerning the complaints of these nations, citing them in the epistles and orations of Rome\u2019s enemies. To be sure, these epistles and orations were in fact written by the Roman authors themselves. Nonetheless, the literary documents in question express their lethal criticism of Rome\u2019s rapacity in an accurate and undistorted manner. One of the great contributions of Pesher Habakkuk lies in its demonstration of the great similarity\u2014to be discussed below\u2014between the Roman historical writings and the hostile description of the Roman empire in an authentic Jewish text. In what follows we steer clear of the \u201cmessianic\u201d element of the hatred toward Rome, instead focusing on Pesher Habakkuk\u2019s critique of Roman imperialism\u2014this being both the core topic of the Pesher, and the main theme of the present study.<br \/>\nClearly, persistent motifs of outrage are not simply the products of ideology, since this ideology grew in a desperate soul. Still, these particular complaints, voiced by one and all, are also the result of a selection process that involves both the given reality and the hatred felt toward Rome. These sources make no mention of the positive influence of Rome. There are a number of anti-Roman arguments preserved in the Latin literature that largely parallel the criticism of Pesher Habakkuk. According to one Roman author, Demetrius king of Illyria complained to Philip of Macedon concerning Rome: they are not content to remain within the borders of Italy and are driven by evil aspirations to conquer the entire world, as if the existence of a king outside their empire were a sin. In Julius Caesar\u2019s account of the Gallic war, the author attributes to a fiercely anti-Roman warrior a speech in which he claims that jealousy of noble warriors drives Rome to try to conquer their cities and enslave them for all time. When the Roman historian Tacitus describes the Roman conquest of Britain, he places in the mouth of a British warrior a fascinating diatribe against Rome: the Romans are robbers stealing from the whole world, but after destroying the earth they scurry for the seas as neither east nor west can sate their terrible appetite. They call raids, robbery, and murder by the euphemism \u2018kingdom,\u2019 and once they have razed a country they call this \u2018peace.\u2019 He then goes on to mention the Roman taxes and the harsh labor the vanquished must endure in the fields, the mines and the ports that have fallen into Roman hands. The great Roman author, Sallust, has King Jugurtha convince another African king to become his ally against Rome by arguing that the Romans are scoundrels, greedy to the very core of their being, and the common enemy of all mankind. Rome fights against foreign nations because they hunger for political power, seeking out the wealthy and making of them Rome\u2019s enemies.<br \/>\nThe same Sallust also composed a text that sheds light both on the anti-imperialist criticism of Rome in Pesher Habakkuk, and on the praise of Roman power in 1 Maccabees. I am referring to the epistle of Mithridates the King of Pontus, the sworn enemy of Rome. The epistle is supposedly intended for the Parthian king:<\/p>\n<p>The Romans have one ancient reason for fighting against all nations, people, and kings, that being a deep lust for power and wealth \u2026 since the ocean blocked their westward progress, they have turned their arms toward us [i.e. eastward]. From the outset they amassed all their wealth by robbing homes, women, fields and kingdom \u2026 they were created as a plague upon the world. Nothing, neither man nor god, can stop them from looting and corrupting their friends and allies, be they weak or powerful, be they near or far. They see all who refuse to willfully submit to them as enemies\u2014especially the kingdoms \u2026 the Romans aim their weapons against one and all, and with terrible aggression turn on those whose defeat promises Rome the greatest reward. They reached their glory by their daring and their deceit, and an endless chain of wars.<\/p>\n<p>This is the closest and fullest parallel to the Pesher Habakkuk criticism of the Romans. Especially noteworthy is that Mithridates\u2019 epistle states explicitly that the Romans gained their power by deceit, or, as Pesher Habakkuk would have it (3.5\u20136): \u201call their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations.\u201d In 1 Maccabees this rather questionable mode of conquest is transformed into a positive trait: \u201cThey had conquered the whole region through their sagacity and perseverance\u201d (8:4). The author of 1 Maccabees further praises Rome as a faithful ally, while the epistle of Mithridates describes them as robbing and destroying their friends and allies, both near and far.<br \/>\nPast Roman conquests appear in parallel lists in both 1 Maccabees and the epistle of Mithridates, but serving opposite purposes. Both 1 Maccabees and Sallust mention Philip and Perseus, the Greek kings, as well as Antiochus III of Syria and Eumenes King of Pergamum. According to the former source, the Romans defeated Philip and Perseus who rose up against them, while Antiochus led a great army against Rome but was vanquished and many of his lands were given to Eumenes. Thus, the Romans defeat those who attack them (see also verses 9\u201311) and the transfer of lands is proof of Rome\u2019s beneficence toward its allies. How very different is the portrait in the epistle of Mithridates! There the list serves as proof of Rome\u2019s unfettered desire for power, of its greed, and more than anything else of its faithlessness. When the Romans were concerned by the threat from Carthage, they pretended to be friends of King Philip of Macedon; when the danger passed, they waged war against him. When Antiochus rushed to Philip\u2019s aid, they tempted him with concessions in Asia, but after defeating Philip they took many of Antiochus\u2019s lands and stole great riches from him. When they defeated Philip\u2019s son, Perseus, they promised to spare his life, but ultimately used deception to cause his death. As for Eumenes, king of Pergamum, the Romans first offered him to Antiochus as a prize for keeping the peace, then entrusted him with some of the lands of the vanquished Antiochus, then they humiliated and robbed so that he went from being a king to the most wretched of slaves, ultimately taking Asia Minor for themselves through deceit and machinations. And this is the man in whose friendship Rome glories! There is no question that the Essene author of Pesher Habakkuk was of a piece with the arguments that Sallust attributes to Mithridates, sworn enemy of Rome, both with regard to Rome\u2019s treatment of other nations and to its motivations.<br \/>\nClearly, then, there is a correlation between the claims against Rome voiced by Pesher Habakkuk, and those that Latin authors attribute to the enemies of Rome. The similarity indicates that the Roman writers accurately conveyed the complaints of Rome\u2019s victims, as the author of Pesher Habakkuk is himself an important representative of the anti-Roman ideology as such. But the significance of Pesher Habakkuk\u2014and Pesher Nahum as well\u2014is particularly great inasmuch as they provide evidence for a pre-70 Jewish polemic against Rome.<br \/>\nThe period after the destruction of the Second Temple provides us many anti-Roman Jewish texts, from the sublime to the ridiculous. And while these texts\u2014all of which are dated after the Essene pesharim\u2014clearly express the particularly religious aspect of Jewish resistance to Rome, they also represent the general hostility of the peoples under Roman domination. The continuity between Pesher Habakkuk\u2019s vicious critique of Rome and later, post-70 voices, is demonstrated by a parallel passage in 4 Ezra, written some thirty years after the destruction of the Second Temple:<\/p>\n<p>You, the fourth that has come, have conquered all the beasts that have gone before; and you have held sway over the world with much terror, and over all the earth with grievous oppression; and for so long you have dwelt on the earth with deceit. And you injured the peaceable; you have hated those who tell the truth, and have loved liars; you have destroyed all the dwellings of those who brought forth fruit, and have laid low the wall of those who did you no harm. And so your insolence has come up before the Most High, and your pride to the Mighty One. And the Most High has looked upon his times, and behold, they are ended, and his ages are completed. (4 Ezra 11:40\u201344)<\/p>\n<p>To be sure, this is a more abstract description than the rich and detailed language of Pesher Habakkuk\u2014but it follows the same blueprint. A key element highlighted in Pesher Habakkuk but absent in 4 Ezra is the economic aspect of Rome\u2019s wickedness. Both texts speak of the \u201cfear and dread\u201d Rome strikes in the hearts of \u201call the peoples\u201d (1QpHab 3.2\u20135 and 4.7\u20138), since they \u201cheld sway over the world with much terror\u201d (4 Ezra 11:40); Rome rules through scheming, for \u201call their thoughts are premeditated to do evil, and with cunning and treachery they behave towards all the nations\u201d (1QpHab 3.5\u20136). The Essene author also states that they \u201cdespise the fortresses of the peoples and with derision laugh at them, they surround them with a huge army to capture them. And through dread and fear they surrender into their hands\u201d (1QpHab 4.5\u20138), a motif that recurs in 4 Ezra: \u201cyou have destroyed all the dwellings of those who brought forth fruit, and have laid low the wall of those who did you no harm\u201d (4 Ezra 11:42). It is certainly possible that the author is recalling the destruction visited upon the land of Israel and the temple some thirty years earlier, but the Jewish seer does not speak here for Israel alone; he identifies with all the victims of Roman imperialism. The fourth kingdom rules the land with injustice, torments the poor and distresses the peaceful, hates men of truth and loves the liars. 4 Ezra expresses its compassion for all the victims of the wicked kingdom more explicitly than does Pesher Habakkuk.<\/p>\n<p>IX<\/p>\n<p>We have just seen the affinity between Pesher Habakkuk and the anti-Roman polemic in 4 Ezra. From the outset, then, when it first suffered under Roman aggression, Israel became the chief spokesman against the empire. It was not, however, unique, as other sources attest. Pesher Habakkuk is an important witness to the anti-Roman ideology that had spread through these nations as early as the second century B.C.E. It faithfully reflects the arguments against Rome voiced by those who experienced the dreadful cruelty of Roman imperialism. The work is of particular importance inasmuch as it is apparently the earliest witness to a Jewish polemic against Rome, as well as the first witness to a Jewish expectation of the future downfall of the empire.<br \/>\nPesher Habakkuk fits well with the chorus of voices crying out against the suffocating power of Rome, a striking exemplar of the resistance to imperialism as such, voices that are still heard to this day. Needless to say, these expressions of protest were one-sided, just as the pro-empire ideology propagated by Rome itself focused exclusively on the light while ignoring the readily apparent dark sides of Rome\u2019s world dominance. In this context it should be noted that the Roman empire played a positive role in advancing civilization, establishing peace and developing the legal system. The Jews recognized these achievements, as we see from the Babylonian Talmud, where the cultural and judicial contributions of Rome are recognized, even though, as Rabbi Isaac says: \u201cWhat is the meaning of the verse \u2018If favor is shown to the wicked they will not learn righteousness\u2019 (Isa. 26:10)? [The patriarch] Isaac said to the Holy One Blessed be He: \u2018Master of the Universe, show grace upon Esau [the rabbinic symbol of Rome].\u2019 God said to him, \u2018He is wicked.\u2019 [Isaac] said, then he \u2018will not learn righteousness.\u2019 Said God, \u2018In the land of uprightness [= Israel] they deal perversely\u2019 (ibid.). Said Isaac, If so, let them \u2018not see the majesty of the Lord\u2019 (ibid.)\u201d (Tractate Megillah 6a).<br \/>\nBut even if we recognize the positive aspects of this great kingdom, we cannot but feel sympathy for those who long ago rose up against the injustice this superpower visited upon so many nations, but aversion to the praise of Roman might in 1 Maccabees. It is striking that the laudatory words of 1 Maccabees are so similar to the rebuke of Pesher Habakkuk, failing to mention the very issues for which the Roman rule truly deserved praise. The author of this questionable passage seems to assume that it is better to forge an alliance with the unfettered, aggressive and rapacious power of Rome, since this is an empire that is faithful to its allies. As such, Roman might will not harm the Jewish people, but to the contrary: its terrific force will be channeled solely for their benefit. Future events will show just how fundamentally and tragically mistaken this view really was.<br \/>\nBe all that as it may, the description of Rome\u2019s greatness in 1 Maccabees is the oddest such praise to reach us. To my mind, it proves that the power of worship, detached from any moral consideration and clear sense of future events, is a losing proposition. Pesher Habakkuk, on the other hand, was composed by a group with an acute sense of justice, very sensitive to social iniquities, and a deep disdain for looting under the auspices of the state. It is clear, then, why the Essenes could rightly recognize the dark underbelly of Roman imperialism, which would threaten all. Pesher Habakkuk, then, stands out as an important historical attestation of the anti-Roman ideology within the Jewish people and, indeed, within the ancient world.<\/p>\n<p>15.      The Eschatological Temple<\/p>\n<p>Dedicated to my friend Shmuel Safrai,<br \/>\non the occasion of his 80th birthday<\/p>\n<p>The last chapter in my book on Jesus deals with two Jewish approaches to the end of days: one found in Jewish apocalyptic literature, the other in the writings of the rabbinic sages. Both describe the world to come in fundamentally similar terms; it will be a post-historical era, the time of a new creation, the resurrection of the dead and the great day of judgment; in the end of days, a new Jerusalem will be established, in which God himself will construct a new and everlasting temple. Judaism is not, of course, based on binding dogmas, so not all Jews accepted this conceptual construct in its entirety.<br \/>\nA concise summary of the Jewish view of the eschaton is found in the opening of the Qaddish \u201cWho Renews\u201d (\u05d3\u05d9 \u05d7\u05d3\u05ea\u05d0), which I cite here according to the prayer book of Rav Sa\u2019adia Gaon (p. 350): \u201cWho will renew the world and resurrect the dead, he will establish the city of Jerusalem and beautify the temple, and uproot the worship of idols [literally: created things], then bringing about a love for the worship of God.\u201d<br \/>\nAnother description of what Israel can expect after the new creation is cited in the name of Rabbi Elazar of Modi\u201bin (early second century C.E.), in his interpretation of Exodus 16:25: \u201cIf you will succeed in keeping the Sabbath, the Holy One, blessed be He, will give you six good portions: The land of Israel, the future world, the new world, the Kingdom of the house of David, the priesthood, and the Levites\u2019 offices. Thus [Scripture] states, \u2018eat it today\u2019.\u201d True, the list does not explicitly mention the new Jerusalem and the reconstructed temple, but they are undoubtedly included in \u2018the Kingdom of the house of David,\u2019 and \u2018the priesthood.\u2019<br \/>\nOn the other hand, the list in the \u201cWho Renews\u201d qaddish does not describe the act of new creation (but rather states it as something that will happen in the future), an act that is necessary for all the events it enumerates. A new creation is already mentioned as early as Isaiah 65:17: \u201cFor I am about to create new heavens and a new earth; the former things shall not be remembered or come to mind\u201d (and see also 66:22). This idea gained wide currency in the apocalyptic and eschatological literature in both the Second Temple period and post-70. A survey of the relevant sources indicates that the concept of a new Jerusalem and an eschatological temple developed in the wake of the destruction of the first temple and the return of the Babylonian exiles.<br \/>\nThe sages recognize three distinct temples: the first temple, the second temple, and the eschatological temple, which will be built by God\u2019s own hand, as it is written: \u201cthe sanctuary, O Lord, that your hands have established\u201d (Exod. 15:17). The Qumran community also recognized three temples; however the second of these did not correspond to the temple that stood in their day, since they considered it a fundamental error, an impure place that could not house the divine spirit. In its stead, they offer a proper temple, i.e., the one whose structure and cultic rituals are described in the Temple Scroll. And indeed, we find in this text mention both of the proper temple that is intended to replace the corrupt structure in Jerusalem, and of the eschatological temple:<\/p>\n<p>7. I shall accept them. They shall be for me a people and I will be for them forever; and I shall dwell<br \/>\n8. with them for ever and always. I shall sanctify my temple with my glory, for I shall make my glory reside<br \/>\n9. over it until the day of creation, when I shall create my temple,<br \/>\n10. establishing it for my self for all days, according to the covenant that I made with Jacob at Bethel. (11Q19 [= 11QTemple] 29.7\u201310)<\/p>\n<p>This passage is very similar to the opening chapter of the Book of Jubilees, so much so that there may be a literary connection between the two:<\/p>\n<p>Write for Moses from the first creation until my presence rests in their midst forever and ever. And the Lord will appear in the sight of all. And everyone will know that I am the God of Israel and the father of all the children of Jacob and king upon Mount Zion forever and ever. And Zion and Jerusalem will be holy.\u2026 From the day of the new creation when the heaven and earth and all of their creatures shall be renewed according to the powers of heaven and according to the whole nature of earth, until the sanctuary of the Lord is created in Jerusalem upon Mount Zion, and all of the lights will be renewed for healing and peace and blessing for all the elect of Israel and in order that it might be thus from that day and unto all the days of the earth. (Jubilees 1.27\u201329)<\/p>\n<p>There are two elements common to this passage from Jubilees and the Temple Scroll: an ideal temple in the present, and a new creation in which God himself will forge the ultimate, eternal temple. Incidentally, these elements are also cited in the qaddish \u201cWho Renews.\u201d<br \/>\nBut what then happens with the proper temple, the one that replaces the one now standing (assuming it does not perish with the world)? 1 Enoch 90.28\u201329 proposes one answer: the temple and all its vessels will be transported to a southern location, while God builds a bigger and better temple in Jerusalem. This solution is reminiscent of the account in 1 Maccabees 4:43\u201346, regarding the impure altar stones that were removed from the temple during its dedication, and placed in an appropriate location on the Temple Mount.<br \/>\nIn the Temple Scroll, God says: \u201cI shall make my glory reside over [the present temple] until the day of creation, when I shall create my temple, establishing it for myself for all days, according to the covenant which I made with Jacob at Bethel\u201d (29.9\u201310). Clearly the reference here is not to Jacob\u2019s second visit to Bethel (Gen. 35:6\u20137), when Jacob says of the site: \u201cHow awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven\u201d (Gen. 28:17). This verse is the basis for the midrashic interpretation according to which Jacob saw the first temple in his vision at Bethel. The midrash builds on the opening of Jacob\u2019s blessing to Benjamin, since the temple would be located in the latter\u2019s tribal territory. The midrash opens: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018[The High God] surrounds him\u2019\u2014this refers to the First Temple; \u2018all day long\u2019\u2014this refers to the Second Temple; \u2018[the beloved] rests between his shoulders\u2019\u2014built and beautified in the future.\u201d The Sifre then turns to discuss the three patriarchs, though it is evident that Abraham and Isaac are a secondary insertion, since it was Jacob who had a vision of the future temple while at Bethel. Unfortunately, all three midrashim concerning the patriarchs have been reworked into a uniform mold, in which each in turn \u201csaw it built, saw it destroyed, and saw it rebuilt.\u201d Only the last segment retains its original form, namely, the construction of the eschatological temple following the new creation, \u201che saw it built and beautified in the future.\u201d This is the same temple referred to in the Qumran Temple Scroll. The original shape of the midrash is preserved only in the discussion of Benjamin. Note that the language here refers to a temple to be beautified for the future time, much as the qaddish \u201cWho Renews\u201d tells that God will, in the future, \u201cbeautify the temple.\u201d<br \/>\nIn the text of the Sifre Deuteronomy we have before us today we find: \u201cSimilarly you find that Jacob saw it built, saw it destroyed and saw it rebuilt, as it is said: \u2018and he was afraid,\u2019 and said \u2018How awesome is this place\u2019\u2014indicating that it was built\u2014\u2018there is none\u2019\u2014indicating that it was destroyed\u2014\u2018other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven\u2019\u2014indicating that he saw it built and beautified in the future.\u201d However, I believe we can reconstruct with a fair degree of accuracy the original statement concerning Jacob, using the midrash on Benjamin: \u201cAnd he was afraid, and said, \u2018How awesome is this place\u2019\u2014this is the first temple, \u2018This is none other than the house of God\u2019\u2014this is the last [= second] temple, \u2018and this is the gate of heaven\u2019\u2014built and beautified in the future.\u201d In any case, it is worth noting that both the Essenes and the sages speak of three temples\u2014the first, the second, and the beautified eschatological temple. The difference between the two groups lies in their attitude toward the second temple: the Essenes considered it illegitimate and proposed an ideal temple in its stead. The most striking aspect of all this is that both the Essenes and the sages believed that after the new creation God himself would build a beautiful temple. Here, then, is one of the reasons\u2014though certainly not the only one\u2014that the destruction of the first temple was not experienced as such a trauma.<br \/>\nLet us return now to the Temple Scroll. As noted, the scroll does not explicitly discuss the nature of the covenant forged between God and Jacob, perhaps because this is an issue discussed in a subsequent section that is no longer extant. It stands to reason that the scroll did not limit its discussion to the ideal temple that is slated to replace the Jerusalem structure (29.9\u201310), but referred also to the temple that will come about after the new creation. Nonetheless, I suspect that the author assumed that Jacob\u2019s vision included the first temple as well.<br \/>\nIn order to more fully understand the meaning of the three temples both for the sectarian, Essene thought and for the rabbis, we should examine chapter 32 of 2 Baruch, which was composed circa 100 C.E., and is similar to 4 Ezra in time and in literary form. 2 Baruch was putatively composed by Baruch the scribe prior to the destruction of the first temple. Baruch announces that the temple in Jerusalem will soon be destroyed, but later rebuilt. However this second building too will fall, but rather be abandoned and razed until the end of days. God will then bring about a new creation and only then will the temple be renewed and formed as the most beautiful edifice in the world. There is a great similarity between this account and the description in the Qumran Temple Scroll, on the one hand, and the discussion of the third temple in the rabbinic midrash (as discussed above), on the other. Note that the Qumran scroll has God speaking of a new creation, \u201cwhen I shall create my temple, establishing it for my self for all days,\u201d echoing the well-known rabbinic view that God would construct the eschatological temple with his own hands.<br \/>\nOur study points to a number of conclusions. For one thing, we have here further evidence for a position that should have been clear long ago, namely, that many issues that are attested only post-70 need to be dated to Second Temple times. An example would be the sentence for the Jewish grace after meals: \u201cThe Merciful will see us to Messianic era and to the days of the world to come.\u201d This is by all accounts a late addition to the grace after meals, but it is nonetheless significant in that it reflects the tripartite division into this world, the messianic era, and the world to come. This same division is attested at least as early as the first century C.E., and is found in the teachings of Jesus and the rabbinic sages; indeed, it is common down to this very day. In the eschatological and apocalyptic literature\u2014including the Essene writings\u2014we find the view that this world to come will emerge from a new creation\u2014as stated in the qaddish \u201cWho Renews\u201d: \u201cWho will renew the world and resurrect the dead, he will establish the city of Jerusalem and beautify the temple.\u201d Column 29 of the Temple Scroll is the final proof that the belief in an eschatological temple was already circulating during Second Temple times. What is unique about the Essene perspective is their belief that the Second Temple was illegitimate, so they described an ersatz earthly temple and then used their rich (and utopian) imagination to describe this edifice in the Temple Scroll. However, we must also keep in mind that the Essenes formulated an obligatory set of dogmas, while other Jews were not committed to a strict and consistent set of beliefs.<\/p>\n<p>Addendum<\/p>\n<p>In chapter 17 of Seder \u02bfOlam we find: \u201cAnd in the second year of Ahaziahu, Elijah was hidden away and is not seen until the Messiah comes, and in the messianic era he is seen but then hidden a second time and not seen until the advent of Gog. And now he writes the events of all the generations.\u201d This mysterious statement was discussed by Meir Friedmann in the introduction to his edition of Tanna de-Bei Eliyahu, p. 25. It seems to me that dual advents are the result of some vacillation that came about from the combination of two eschatological views, when the messianic age was inserted between this world and the world to come. The same doubling is found in the Book of Revelation (20:8), which describes Gog and Magog after an intermediary millennium, but prior to the final judgment and new creation of chapter 21. Another fascinating passage is found in Acts 3:20\u201323, though this is undoubtedly rooted in an Elijah tradition, as other scholars have duly noted.<\/p>\n<p>16.      Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes in Pesher Nahum<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>Usually when a new discovery is made that provides heretofore unknown historical information, the scholarly world is surprised by the new data and the light it sheds on the past, even though the discoveries tend to affirm the fidelity of the sources that had been known up to that point. This paradoxical response is the result of a consistent tendency within scholarly circles to underestimate the accuracy of historical sources, particularly those composed by ancient historians\u2014even historians who have their own goals and agendas. The central challenge of analyzing secondary sources is not, then, the need to discount their often tendentious viewpoint as such, but rather that absent the primary sources it is difficult to identify the author\u2019s perspective on the reality reflected in his writings.<br \/>\nThe Dead Sea Scrolls are one of the most interesting proofs for the above statement. There are, to be sure, a number of scholars who argue that the members of the Qumran community are not Essenes, and these views do sometimes find favor in the broader public. However, this is largely because those who see the Qumran community as Essenes are so confident in the identification that they no longer bother to gather supporting evidence. As one scholar has rightly noted, in the early days of Qumran scholarship, Josephus\u2019s description of the Essenes was used to clarify the Qumran scrolls, but today, with the publication of additional scrolls and advances in research, the Qumran scrolls shed light on Josephus\u2019s account of the Essenes. Indeed, the Essene writings demonstrate just how accurate Josephus was in describing the community, what aspects of their life he passed over in silence, and how lacking such precision is in Philo\u2019s historical writings. The scrolls indicate that Josephus writes as a responsible historian, while Philo is more of an apologetic midrashist.<br \/>\nBut while the discovery of the scrolls has provided answers for most of the questions raised by Josephus\u2019s description of the Essenes, one major issue remains unanswered: is the division of Second Temple Jewish society into three schools a schematic construct invented by Josephus, or a more or less accurate reflection of the historical reality of the day? The publication of the Dead Sea Scroll known as Pesher Nahum indicates that it was not just Josephus who divided Jewish society into three schools\u2014the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Essenes\u2014but the Essenes themselves adhered to this view.<br \/>\nThe central aim of this essay is to demonstrate the concord between Josephus and the Scrolls. In addition I will try to lay bare some of the interpretive tools the Essenes employed in dividing the Jewish landscape into Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes.<br \/>\nWhat follows is the extant text of Pesher Nahum.<\/p>\n<p>Column 1<br \/>\n1.      [\u2026] residence for the wicked of the nations. \u201cWhere the lion goes, and the lion\u2019s cubs<br \/>\n2.      [with no one to disturb them\u201d (Nahum 2:11) Its interpretation concerns Deme]trius, king of Yavan, who wanted to enter Jerusalem on the advice of those looking for smooth interpretations (dorshei halakot).<br \/>\n3.      [But he did not enter, for God had not given Jerusalem] into the hand of the kings of Yavan from Antiochus up to the appearance of the chiefs of the Kittim. But later, it will be trampled.<br \/>\n4.      [\u2026] \u201cThe lion has torn enough for his whelps and strangled prey for his lioness,<br \/>\n5.      he has filled his caves with prey and his dens with torn flesh\u201d (Nahum 2:12). [The interpretation of the matter] concerns the Angry Lion who struck (together) with his nobles and the men of his council<br \/>\n6.      [the simple folk of Ephraim. And concerning what he says: \u201che has filled] his caves [with prey] and his den with torn flesh,\u201d its interpretation concerns the Angry Lion<br \/>\n7.      [who filled his cave with a mass of corpses, carrying out rev]enge against those looking for smooth interpretations, who hanged living men<br \/>\n8.      [from the tree, committing an atrocity which had not been committed] in Israel since ancient times, for it is [hor]rible for the one hanged alive from the tree. \u201cSee, I am against [you],<br \/>\n9.      says the [Lord of hosts, and I will burn your chariots in smoke,] and the sword shall devour your young lions. [I will] cut off your prey [from the earth],<br \/>\n10.      [and the] voice [of your messengers] shall be heard no more\u201d (Nahum 2:13). Its interpretation: \u201cYour chariots\u201d are his gangs of soldiers [\u2026]; \u201chis young lions\u201d are<br \/>\n11.      his nobles [and the members of his council \u2026] and \u201chis prey\u201d is the wealth which [the priests] of Jerusalem accu[mulated] which<br \/>\n12.      they will deliver [\u2026 E]phraim, will be given Israel [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>Column 2<br \/>\n1.      And his messengers are his emissaries, whose voice will no longer be heard among the nations. \u201cAh! City of bloodshed, utterly [deceitful], full of booty\u201d (Nahum 3:1).<br \/>\n2.      Its interpretation: it is the city of Ephraim, those looking for smooth interpretations, in the final days, since they walk in treachery and lies.<br \/>\n3.      \u201cNo end to the plunder! The crack of whip and rumble of wheel, galloping horse and bounding chariot! Horsemen charging, flashing sword and glittering spear,<br \/>\n4.      piles of dead, heaps of corpses, dead bodies without end\u2014they stumble over the bodies!\u201d (Nahum 3:1\u20133). Its interpretation concerns the rule of those looking for smooth interpretations,<br \/>\n5.      from whose assembly the sword of the gentiles will not be lacking, nor captivity or looting, nor fire among them, nor exile for fear of the enemy; a mass<br \/>\n6.      of guilty corpses will fall in their days; there will be no end to the tally of the wounded and they will even trip over their bodies of flesh because of their guilty counsel.<br \/>\n7.      \u201cBecause of the countless debaucheries of the prostitute, gracefully alluring, mistress of sorcery, who enslaves nations through her debaucheries, and peoples through her sorcery\u201d (Nah 3:4).<br \/>\n8.      [Its] interpretation concerns the misleaders from Ephraim, who with their fraudulent teaching and lying tongue and perfidious lip misdirect many:<br \/>\n9.      kings, princes, priests and people together with the proselyte attached to them. Cities and clans will perish through their advice, nobles and leaders<br \/>\n10.      will fall [due to the fero]city of their tongues. \u201cI am against you, says the Lord of hosts, you will lift up<br \/>\n11.      [your] skirts over your face; and I will let the nations look on your nakedness and kingdoms [on your] shame\u201d (Nah 3:5). Its interpretation [\u2026]<br \/>\n12.      [\u2026] the cities of the east, because \u201cyour skirts\u201d [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>Column 3<br \/>\n1.      The nations with their uncleanness and with their detestable abominations. \u201cI will throw filth at you and treat you with contempt and make you<br \/>\n2.      a spectacle. Then all who see you will shrink from you\u201d (Nah 3:6\u20137).<br \/>\n3.      Its interpretation concerns those looking for smooth interpretations, whose evil deeds will be exposed to all Israel in the final time;<br \/>\n4.      many will fathom their sin, and will hate them and loathe them for their reprehensible arrogance. And when the glory of Judah is revealed<br \/>\n5.      the simple people of Ephraim will flee from among their assembly and desert the ones who misdirected them and will join the majority of Israel. \u201cThey will say:<br \/>\n6.      Nineveh is devastated; who will bemoan her? Where shall I seek comforters for you?\u201d Its interpretation concerns those looking for<br \/>\n7.      smooth interpretations, whose council will die and whose society will be disbanded; they shall not continue misdirecting the assembly and simple folk<br \/>\n8.      shall no longer support their council. \u201cAre you better than Amon that sat surrounded by rivers?\u201d (Nah 3:8).<br \/>\n9.      Its interpretation: Amon is Manasseh and the rivers are the great men of Manasseh, the honorable [people who surround] Manasseh.<br \/>\n10.      \u201cWater around her, her rampart a sea, water her wall\u201d (Nah 3:8)<br \/>\n11.      Its interpretation: they are her men at arms, her mighty warriors. \u201cEthiopia was her strength, Egypt too, and that without limit\u201d (Nah 3:9).<br \/>\n12.      [Its interpretation:] \u2026 \u201cPut and [the Libyans were her helpers]<\/p>\n<p>Column 4<br \/>\n1.      Its interpretation: they are the wick[ed ones of Judah], the house of division (\u05e4\u05dc\u05d2 \u05d1\u05d9\u05ea), which consorted with Manasseh. \u201cYet she became an exile, she went into captivity;<br \/>\n2.      even her infants were dashed in pieces at the head of every street; lots were cast for her nobles, all her dignitaries were bound in<br \/>\n3.      fetters\u201d (Nah 3:10). Its interpretation concerns Manasseh, in the last time, in which his dominion over Israel will weaken [\u2026]<br \/>\n4.      his women, his children and his babies will go into captivity, his warriors and his honored ones [will perish] by the sword. [\u201cyou also will be drunken]<br \/>\n5.      you will go into hiding\u201d (Nah 3:11). Its interpretation concerns the wicked of E[phraim who \u2026]<br \/>\n6.      whose cup will come after Manasseh [\u2026 \u201cYou will seek]<br \/>\n7.      a refuge from the enemy\u201d (Nah 3:11). Its interpretation concerns [\u2026]<br \/>\n8.      their enemies in the city, [\u2026 \u201cAll your fortresses are like<br \/>\n9.      fig trees wi[th young fruit\u201d \u2026]<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>Even before the publication of Pesher Nahum there were scholars who suggested that Qumran scrolls use dorshei halakot, \u201cthose looking for smooth interpretations,\u201d as a reference to the Pharisees. The people referred to in this way are presented as hypocrites, lacking integrity. Elsewhere in the Dead Sea Scrolls there is repeated reference to the deceptive ways of the dorshei halakot, and in particular the lies they use when speaking to the people. Within Pesher Nahum their doctrines are referred as \u201cfraudulent teaching\u201d (2.8). And we find other Second Temple sources that refer to the Pharisees\u2014or at least some of them\u2014as hypocrites. This charge is leveled by Alexander Jannaeus, the Sadducee king (b. Sotah 22b), in rabbinic literature, and in the teachings of Jesus. It is not the goal of the present study to examine the historical circumstances that gave rise to this accusation. I will only note that the rabbis adhere to the Pharisee teachings, and that Jesus too says that the Pharisees sit on Moses\u2019 seat (Matt. 23:2\u20133), that is, that one is to abide by their teachings though not by their actions. The Qumran community, in contrast, is vehemently opposed to the Pharisee doctrines, to their \u201cfraudulent teaching.\u201d The Scrolls generally, and Pesher Nahum in particular, confirm the accounts of Josephus and the later rabbis, according to whom the Pharisees held the allegiance of the majority of the Jews\u2014though this is seen as a terrible calamity. The Pharisee sages are characterized as involved in misdirection: \u201cthe misleaders from Ephraim, who with their fraudulent teaching and lying tongue and perfidious lip misdirect many: kings, princes, priests and people together with the proselyte attached to them. Cities and clans will perish through their advice, nobles and leaders will fall due to the ferocity of their tongue\u201d (2.8\u201310). The tremendous influence of the Pharisee sages on mainstream Jewish society is seen by the Qumran community almost as the ancient enticements to idolatry in biblical times: the author of Pesher Hosea laments that Israel \u201clistened to those who misdirected them and they acclaimed them, and feared them in their blindness like god\u201d (4Q166 [= 4QpHosa] 2.5\u20136). As for Pesher Nahum, it voices the hope that \u201cin the final time,\u201d the \u201cevil deed\u201d of the dorshei halakot \u201cwill be exposed to all Israel\u201d and the people will simply abandon them.<br \/>\nIn light of all that has been said, it appears the phrase dorshei halakot serves in the Qumran writings to indicate the hypocrisy of the Pharisees in their preaching to Israel. It stands to reason, then, that the basic sense of this appellation is that the Pharisee doctrine is \u201cfraudulent teaching,\u201d that is, that they interpret the Torah hypocritically or smoothly. The Hebrew word midrash appears frequently in the Qumran writings, and indeed \u201cmidrash ha-torah,\u201d \u2018the study of the Law,\u2019 is the goal of their journey into the desert (1QS 8.15). Similarly we find in the Manual of Discipline \u201cAnd in the place in which the ten assemble there should not be missing a man to interpret the Law day and night always\u201d (1QS 6.6\u20137). The heir of the Teacher of Righteousness is called \u2018the interpreter of the Law\u2019 (doresh ha-torah), and this is also the title of the Aaronite messiah in the future time. In light of these phrases it would appear that the Pharisees are characterized as \u201clooking for smooth interpretations\u201d because they study and preach the Torah using easy or smooth interpretations.<br \/>\nAll this makes the identification of the Scrolls\u2019 dorshei halakot with the Pharisees almost certain, since they are the religious party that is suspected of hypocrisy and whose preaching is heard throughout the Jewish society of the day. However, the clearest proof of this matter appeared with the publication of the first column of Pesher Nahum, which discussed the fact that \u201cDeme]trius, king of Yavan, \u2026 wanted to enter Jerusalem on the advice of those looking for smooth interpretations (dorshei halakot)\u201d (1.2). In addition the column speaks of the Angry Lion, who sought \u201c[\u2026 rev]enge against those looking for smooth interpretations, who hanged living men [from the tree, committing an atrocity which had not been committed] in Israel since ancient times\u201d (1.6\u20138). There is no question but that these lines refer to the invasion of the Hellenistic king Demetrius in 89 B.C.E., who was invited by the Pharisees to do battle against Alexander Jannaeus. After the foreign king departed, Jannaeus hanged eight hundred Pharisees from a tree.<br \/>\nTo the evidence of the first column we must add the following from the second: \u201cthe rule of those looking for smooth interpretations, from whose assembly the sword of the gentiles will not be lacking, nor captivity or looting, nor fire among them, nor exile for fear of the enemy; a mass of guilty corpses will fall in their days; there will be no end to the tally of the wounded and they will even trip over their bodies of flesh because of their guilty counsel\u201d (2.4\u20136). This is a clear allusion to the rule of the Pharisees during the days of Queen Alexandra Salome. The dark description of the \u201crule of those looking for smooth interpretations\u201d is not substantively different than Josephus\u2019s description of the period. The pesher itself was undoubtedly composed when Israel was under Roman rule, since it speaks of the period from \u201cthe kings of Yavan from Antiochus up to the appearance of the chiefs of the Kittim\u201d (1.3), the latter being a reference to the Romans.<br \/>\nThe founder of the Essene movement was a priest famously referred to as the \u201cTeacher of Righteousness\u201d (see the Pesher to Psalm 37 3.15\u201316; CD 1.11). Who then headed the Pharisees, those looking for smooth interpretations? The answer to this question is found in the Damascus Document, which speaks of the time when \u201cthe scoffer arose, who poured out over Israel water of lies and made them stray into the wilderness without path \u2026 so that the curses of his covenant would adhere to them \u2026 for they sought smooth interpretations \u2026\u201d (CD 1.16\u201318). The individual known by the Essenes as \u201cthe scoffer\u201d is also referred to as \u201cthe man of deceit\u201d and \u201cthe Preacher of Deceit.\u201d This catalogue of appellations, which suits the usual pejorative tone, allows us to uncover the Essene polemics aimed specifically against the Pharisees. In Pesher Habakkuk (the relevant passages are 2.1\u20134; 5.8\u201312; 10.5\u201313), in Pesher Micah, and in the Damascus Document (namely, 1.12; 2.1; 4.19\u201321; 5.11\u20136.2; 8.12\u201313, 18; 20.10\u201312, 14\u201315), mention of the so-called Preacher of Deceit and his followers, while the other polemic passages do not mention this Pharisee leader. The Hodayot include polemical statements against \u201cmediators of deceit \u2026 the congregation of the seekers after flattering things (dorshei halakot)\u201d (1QHa 10.31\u201332; see also 10.14\u201319, 22\u201323, 31\u201337; 12.7\u201312, 14\u201320; 14.5; 15.34). The Pesher Isaiah speaks of \u201cthe congregation of those looking for smooth interpretations who are in Jerusalem\u201d (4Q163 [= 4QpIsac] 2.10\u201311), who are also referred to as \u201cthe arrogant men,\u201d as in \u201cthe arrogant men who are in Jerusalem. They are the ones who \u2018have rejected the instruction of the LORD of hosts, and have despised the word of the Holy One of Israel\u2019 (Isa. 5:24)\u201d (4Q162 [= 4QpIsab] 2.6\u20138). The author of Pesher Nahum speaks of the congregation of those looking for smooth interpretations (1.2, 7\u20138, 12; 2.1\u20133.8; 4.5), though in this text (as in the Pesher to Psalm 37 2.16\u201320) the Pharisees are also referred to as \u2018Ephraim.\u2019 Parts of Pesher Hosea (2.3\u20136) also appear aimed at the Pharisees.<br \/>\nParalleling the Teacher of Righteousness, who founded the Qumran community, stands the \u201cPreacher of Deceit,\u201d depicted in the Dead Sea Scrolls as the founder of the congregation of those who seek after smooth interpretations: he has \u201cmisdirected many \u2026 erecting a community with deceit\u201d (1QpHab 10.9\u201310). As Pesher Habakkuk clearly indicates (see 2.1\u20134; 5.9\u201311; 10.9\u201313), the \u201cPreacher of Deceit\u201d is a contemporary of the Teacher of Righteousness. It stands to reason that during the sect\u2019s exile in Damascus, which apparently occurred after the death of the Teacher of Righteousness, it was persecuted by the community of the Preacher of Deceit, the latter being personally involved in this affair. All this, however, remains speculative.<br \/>\nAnother contemporary of the Teacher of Righteousness and the Preacher of Deceit is the man referred to as the Wicked Priest. Pesher Habakkuk relates that this figure \u201cruled over Israel\u201d (1QpHab 8.9\u201310), and from the reports it is clear that the Scrolls are describing a high priest. He \u201cpursued the teacher of righteousness\u201d (1QpHab 11.5), and even sent to have him killed (4Q171 [= 4QpPsa] 4.8)\u2014though the Essene leader survived the attempt (4Q171 [= 4QpPsa] 2.18\u201320; 4.9). We further are told that \u201che seized public money\u201d (1QpHab 8.12), and thus is one of \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem, who will accumulate riches and loot from plundering the nations. However, in the last days their riches and their loot will be given into the hands of the army of the Kittim\u201d (1QpHab 9.4\u20137), i.e., the Romans. We may conclude, then, that the Wicked Priest was one of the priests of the Hasmonean dynasty, prior to the Roman invasion of Israel. Moreover, it seems that his persecutions were not limited to the Essenes, but included the Pharisees as well, for he is described as having \u201crobbed and hoarded wealth from the violent men who had rebelled against God\u201d (1QpHab 8.11). If we could be sure that the Wicked Priest is another name for the Angry Lion of Pesher Nahum, the one who exacted \u201crevenge against those looking for smooth interpretations, who hanged living men from the tree,\u201d then we could identify the Wicked Priest who persecuted the Teacher of Righteousness as Alexander Jannaeus. This identification, however, is far from certain.<br \/>\nWe may infer, then, that from the time of its founding, by the Teacher of Righteousness, the Qumran sect was in a constant state of ideological conflict with two other parties: the Hasmonean priests, who sided with the Sadducees, and the Pharisee dorshei halakot. At times, tensions boiled over into outright hostilities and persecutions. After the Sadducees suffered two major setbacks\u2014one in the days of Alexandra Salome, another in the days of Pompey\u2014they became much less of a threat to the sect, and the Pharisees became their main opponents. The latter sought \u201cto pour out [the Hodayot author\u2019s] blood, because he was at your service\u201d (1QHa 10.32\u201333), even demanding that he \u201cdesert your service from fear of destruction by the wicked and exchange a firm purpose for follies\u201d (1QHa 10.36; see also 12.10\u201311).<br \/>\nIt is almost definite that later on, apparently beginning with Herod and certainly during the Roman rule following Herod\u2019s death\u2014the Pharisee persecutions ended. In the days of Jesus the Pharisees were ashamed of their forefathers\u2019 religious persecution, saying: \u201cIf we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets\u201d (Matt. 23:30). It appears the Essenes too converted their earlier activism (see, e.g., the War Scroll) into a qualified pacifism, adopting a passive and accommodating stance toward the forces governing this inherently corrupt world. Thus we find that both Philo and Josephus (a Pharisee) are able to praise the Essenes as wholly righteous men, whose fame has spread the world over.<br \/>\nThus far we have concentrated on the anti-Pharisee polemic within the scrolls. Now we must examine whether the Sadducees discussed in the Qumran texts are seen as a separate community, like the Pharisee dorshei halakot.<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>As noted, there have for some time been scholars who recognized an anti-Pharisee polemic in the Dead Sea Scrolls, a hypothesis verified with the publication of the first column of Pesher Nahum. This text demonstrates that the community referred to as those \u201clooking for smooth interpretations\u201d is undoubtedly the Pharisees. Pesher Nahum also refers to this group as \u201cEphraim\u201d (1.12; 2.2, 8; 3.5; 4.5\u20136), but alongside there appears another group, Manasseh (3.9; 4.1, 2, 6). To whom does this biblical epithet refer?<br \/>\nYigael Yadin was the first to suggest the straightforward explanation that if the Pharisees are referred to as \u201cEphraim,\u201d then Manasseh marks the Sadducees. Part of his argument was the phrase \u201cthe great men of Manasseh,\u201d which suggests a defined, hierarchical group, perhaps with some military power. This view was later accepted by the Russian scholar Amusin, as well as by the French Dupont-Sommer. The latter assumed that \u201cEphraim\u201d and \u201cManasseh\u201d refer to two individuals, since the corresponding biblical figures are Joseph\u2019s two sons, and only secondarily the names of tribes. Dupont-Sommer identified the \u201cManasseh\u201d of Pesher Nahum with Aristobulus II, and, more generally, his Sadducee followers, while \u201cEphraim\u201d refers to his brother, John Hyrcanus, and his Pharisee cohorts. Since Dupont-Sommer identifies\u2014wrongly, to my mind\u2014the Wicked Priest with the \u201cPreacher of Deceit,\u201d he naturally associates both epithets with John Hyrcanus. As a result he must identify \u201cthe city of Ephraim, those looking for smooth interpretations\u201d (2.9) with Jerusalem, where John Hyrcanus was located, even though he admits this is problematic. He further argues that Jerusalem is referred to as \u201cNineveh,\u201d in keeping with the terminology of the prophet Nahum. We will see below to what extent Dupont-Sommer\u2019s position can be accepted, but he was surely right to identify Ephraim with the Pharisees and Manasseh with the Sadducees.<br \/>\nThe Russian scholar Amusin came to the same conclusion in an excellent article. His identification of Ephraim and Manasseh in Pesher Nahum is based on two assumptions: First, that the Qumran community understood these names as referring to two tribes, rather than the two sons of Joseph. Indeed, the overriding importance of these tribes in biblical and later Jewish history almost requires this interpretation. The biblical account itself presents Ephraim and Manasseh not as two well-defined fraternal figures, but, as it were, as individuals whose entire raison d\u2019\u00eatre lies in the tribes that will arise from them. Amusin\u2019s second assumption\u2014in a sense an outgrowth of the first\u2014is that the Qumran scrolls do not employ biblical names in a straightforward manner, but always as part of a typological schema. The Qumran community was deeply engaged in Pesher literature, a subspecies of a broader hermeneutic approach familiar from the Second Temple biblical interpretations of Philo and the New Testament. The Qumran sect accepted as a given that ancient events were signs for later generations, and that Scripture contained allusions to the events of the final era, the era of the formation and existence of the community itself. Only an approach that is sensitive to the interpretive assumptions of the Qumran community will properly recognize the historical events alluded to in the Scrolls generally, and in the Pesharim in particular.<br \/>\nThe Scrolls\u2019 typological understanding of the tribal division of biblical Israel clearly reflects the separatist ideology of this sect, which set itself apart from mainstream Jewish society. They justify their separation from the rest of Israel and their retreat into the desert with Isaiah 40:3: \u201cAnd when these have become a community in Israel, in compliance with these arrangements, they are to be segregated from within the dwelling of the men of sin to walk to the desert in order to open there his path. As it is written, \u2018In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God\u2019 (Isa. 40:3)\u201d (1QS 8.12\u201316; see also 9.19\u201320). Elsewhere, the Qumran author uses another verse, Psalm 1:1, to justify the sect\u2019s separation: \u201cMidrash of \u2018Happy are those who do not follow the advice of the wicked\u2019 (Psalm 1:1). The interpretation of this word: they are those who turn aside from the path of the wicked as it is written in the book of Isaiah, the prophet, for the last days: \u201cthe Lord spoke to me while his hand was strong upon me, and removed me from the path of this people\u201d (Isa. 8:11)\u201d (4Q174 [= 4QFlorilegium] 1.14\u201316). The third verse interpreted to indicate that departure from sinning Israel was God\u2019s will is Isaiah 8:11. Now, the Masoretic reading of the verse states that the Lord \u201cwarned me (\u05d5\u05d9\u05e1\u05e8\u05e0\u05d9) not to walk in the way of this people,\u201d but a number of Greek versions reflect \u05d5\u05d9\u05e1\u05d9\u05e8\u05e0\u05d9, \u2018he removed me\u2019 rather than \u05d5\u05d9\u05e1\u05e8\u05e0\u05d9, \u2018he warned me,\u2019 and this is also the reading in the Isaiah scroll: \u201cwhile his hand was strong upon me, he removed me from walking in the way of this people.\u201d This non-Masoretic reading, then, could serve the Qumran community as a biblical prooftext for their separatist ideology, defining themselves as \u201cthe priests and the men of their covenant who have turned away from the path of the nation\u201d (1Qsa [= 1QRule of the Congregation] 1.2\u20133), or as \u201cthose returning from among Israel who turned aside from the path of the people\u201d (CD 8.16), or again as \u201cthe congregation of all the sons of justice, those who established the covenant, those who avoid walking on the path of the nation\u201d (11Q13 [= 11QMelchizedek] 2.24).<br \/>\nBut there is still another verse in Isaiah that the Qumran community used to justify its separation from sinful Israel. As the Damascus Document states:<\/p>\n<p>But all those who despise: when God visits the earth in order to empty over them the punishment of the wicked, when there comes the word which is written in the words of Isaiah son of Amoz, the prophet who said \u201cThe LORD will bring on you and on your people and on your ancestral house such days as have not come since the day that Ephraim departed from Judah\u2014the king of Assyria\u201d (Isa. 7:17). When the two houses of Israel separated, Ephraim detached itself from Judah, and all the renegades were delivered up to the sword: but those who remained steadfast escaped to the land of the north. (CD 7.9\u201314)<\/p>\n<p>The discussion that follows indicates that this escape refers to the sect\u2019s move to Damascus while it was being persecuted. This event was seen by the author as the day that \u201cEphraim detached itself from Judah\u201d as described in Isaiah 7:17 (a verse cited again in CD 13.23\u201314.1). If, then, the members of the sect were removed \u201cfrom walking in the way of this people\u201d (following Isaiah 8:11), then they fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah regarding Ephraim detaching itself from Judah. Moreover, if we are dealing here with the separation of the two houses of Israel, then the Qumran community are not the separatists\u2014it is the rest of the Jews of the day are the true separatists: \u201cEphraim detached itself from Judah.\u201d We see here a typological understanding of the biblical break between the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, cast in terms of contemporary Jewish polemics. There is no question where the allegiance of a Second Temple Jew would lie, when reading the biblical account of this tragic event: the Essenes undoubtedly identified themselves with the kingdom of Judah, i.e., \u201cthe House of Judah, whom God will free from the house of judgment on account of their toil and of their loyalty to the Teacher of Righteousness\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 8.1\u20133). Similarly, we find in the Qumran Scrolls reference to a group that accompanies the Essene sect (\u201cthe Council of the Community\u201d), a group known as \u201cthe simple folk of Judah, those who observe the Law\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 12.3\u20135)\u2014apparently Essene sympathizers in the broader populace. This same terminology, expressing a different ideological position, is also found in the Damascus Document: \u201cBut when the period corresponding to the number of these years is complete, there will no longer be any joining with the house of Judah but rather each one standing up on his watchtower. The wall is built, the boundary far away\u201d (CD 4.10\u201312). Is this a later eschatological stage than Pesher Nahum (3.4\u20135), or perhaps a different, stricter approach? Whatever the answer, it is clear that the Community saw itself as \u201cJudah\u201d or \u201cthe house of Judah.\u201d<br \/>\nThe epithet \u201cManasseh\u201d does not appear in the Damascus Document, and as we will see below, in the Scrolls that contain \u201cManasseh\u201d and \u201cEphraim\u201d the latter refers to the Pharisees, the former to the Sadducees. We have already noted that the only persecutors of the sect mentioned in the Damascus Document are the Pharisees, and their leader, the Preacher of Deceit. Does this mean that the two mentions of \u201cEphraim\u201d in the Damascus Document (7.9\u201314; 13.23\u201314.1) refer only to the Pharisees? If verified, this assertion would be highly significant historically, since it suggests that in the eyes of the sect, the separation of the two houses of Israel resulted from the fact that \u201cEphraim detached itself from Judah\u201d (CD 7.12\u201313), i.e., that the Essenes came about following a break with the Pharisees! However, it is more likely that the Damascus Document reflects an earlier, simpler typology that that of Pesher Nahum (and the Pesher to Psalm 37). For it was the break between the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the First Temple period\u2014\u201cthe day that Ephraim departed from Judah\u201d (Isa. 7:17)\u2014that gave rise to Qumran\u2019s tribe typology. As a result, the Qumran community could refer to itself as the \u201chouse of Judah\u201d and to the rest of the Jewish world, the sinning Jews, as \u201cEphraim.\u201d It is this simple typology, I believe, that we find in the Damascus Document. Only later, when they sought an epithet for the hated Sadducees, they chose the second major tribe of the northern kingdom of Israel, \u201cManasseh,\u201d thus limiting the denotative field of \u201cEphraim\u201d to the Pharisees. In any case, the epithets \u201cJudah\u201d for the Essenes, \u201cEphraim\u201d for the Pharisees, and \u201cManasseh\u201d for the Sadducees, are rooted in a typological understanding of the separation of the biblical nation into the two kingdoms of Judah and Israel.<br \/>\nScholarly discussions of the Qumran epithets have rightly cited Isaiah 11:13 and 9:19\u201320, both of which contain references to Manasseh, Ephraim, and Judah. It is quite possible that the Qumran interpreters used these verses, applying them to the sectarian polemic against the Pharisees and the Sadducees. So far, however, no interpretation of these verses has been uncovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Be all that as it may, I do not think the Isaiah verses are the source of the Qumran community\u2019s typological vocabulary: the Essenes saw themselves as the kingdom of Judah and their enemies as the corrupt kingdom of Israel, leading to the designation of the Pharisees and the Sadducees as Ephraim and Manasseh, respectively.<br \/>\nHow does the identification of Qumran as \u201cJudah,\u201d the Pharisees as \u201cEphraim\u201d and the Sadducees as \u201cManasseh\u201d contribute to our understanding of the dynamic between these three groups in the Second Temple period? We turn first to a short passage from Pesher Hosea, identified as fragment 2 of 4Q167 (= 4QpHosb). The fragment contains the phrase \u201cangry lion\u201d and \u201clion,\u201d and goes on to refer to \u201cthe last priest who will stretch out his hand to strike Ephraim\u201d (line 3). This is a fragmentary pesher to Hosea 5:14: \u201cFor I will be like a lion to Ephraim, like a young lion to the house of Judah.\u201d Pesher Nahum teaches us that this was the name used to refer to Alexander Jannaeus\u2014the historical figure to whom Pesher Nahum attributes the prophet\u2019s words, \u201cThe lion has torn \u2026\u201d (Pesher Nahum 1.4). Jannaeus, then, is the Angry Lion both in Pesher Nahum and in Pesher Hosea, and also \u201cthe last priest\u201d (\u05db\u05d4\u05df \u05d4\u05d0\u05d7\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, which is phonetically similar to \u05db\u05e4\u05d9\u05e8 \u05d4\u05d7\u05e8\u05d5\u05df, the Angry Lion), that is, one of \u201cthe last priests of Jerusalem\u201d referred to in Pesher Habakkuk. According to Pesher Hosea, then, Jannaeus\u2014the Angry Lion who is also the last priest\u2014will \u201cstretch out his hand and strike Ephraim,\u201d i.e., the Pharisees. This event is known to us both from non-Qumran sources and from the first column of Pesher Nahum, which recounts how the Angry Lion carried out \u201crevenge against those looking for smooth interpretations \u2026 hanged living men from the tree\u201d (Pesher Nahum 1.7\u20138). Pesher Hosea does not describe actions taken by Jannaeus against the Essenes, but the biblical verse in question\u2014\u201cFor I will be like a lion to Ephraim, like a young lion to the house of Judah\u201d\u2014suggests that the pesher, only fragments of which are extant, went on to describe how the Angry Lion, having struck Ephraim (the Pharisees), turns to persecute the house of Judah, i.e., the Essenes.<br \/>\nThe fact that Pesher Hosea calls Alexander Jannaeus \u201cthe last priest\u201d makes it somewhat more likely that the Sadducee king is also the figure referred to as \u201cthe wicked priest.\u201d We have already noted that \u201cthe wicked priest\u201d persecuted the Pharisees, and \u201crobbed and hoarded wealth from the violent men who rebelled against God\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 8.11). This is a plausible description even if the wicked priest is not Jannaeus, in light of the dispute between the last Hasmonean priests and the Pharisees. That the wicked priest persecuted the Teacher of Righteousness and his followers is made clear in Pesher Habakkuk. The Pesher to Psalm 37 describes the wicked priest\u2019s attempt to kill the Teacher of Righteousness. The latter survives and the author notes that God will repay the wicked priest in kind, \u201cdelivering him into the hands of ruthless nations so that they can carry out vengeance upon him\u201d (4Q171 4.8\u201310)\u201d\u2014an apparent reference to the Romans. Is this a prophecy of future events, or a past occurrence? According to Pesher Habakkuk (9.9\u201312, and see also 9.1\u20132), the latter is the more likely, since there we find an account of \u201cthe Wicked Priest, whom, for the wickedness against the Teacher of Righteousness and the members of his council, God delivered into the hands of his enemies to disgrace him with a punishment, to destroy him with bitterness of soul for having acted wickedly against his elect.\u201d Does this passage refer to the bitter end of Aristobulus II? If so, he and not Alexander Jannaeus is the Wicked Priest of the Scrolls.<br \/>\nSetting aside these speculations, we turn now to a critical moment in the history of the Qumran community, a moment that only becomes apparent in light of Pesher Nahum\u2019s indication that the community referred to the Pharisees and Sadducees as Ephraim and Manasseh, respectively. The key passage is as follows:<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe wicked draw the sword and bend their bows to bring down the poor and needy, to kill those who walk uprightly; their sword shall enter their own heart, and their bows shall be broken\u201d (Ps. 37:14\u201315). Its interpretation concerns the wicked of Ephraim and Manasseh who will attempt to lay hands on the Priest and the members of his council in the period of testing which will come upon them. However, God will save them from their hands and after they will be delivered into the hands of ruthless nations for judgment. (4Q171 2.16\u201320)<\/p>\n<p>Here we find that \u201cthe wicked of Ephraim and Manasseh\u201d sought to \u201clay hands on the Priest and the members of his council\u201d\u2014language reminiscent of Pesher Habakkuk 9.9\u201310 (\u201cthe Wicked Priest, whom, for the wickedness against the Teacher of Righteousness and the members of his council, God delivered into the hands of his enemies\u201d). The statement that Manasseh and Ephraim will be punished for their persecution of the Priest, i.e. the Teacher of Righteousness, by being \u201cdelivered into the hands of ruthless nations for judgment,\u201d is very similar to the later section of the pesher that describes the Wicked Priest\u2019s punishment as God \u201cdelivering him into the hands of ruthless nations so that they can carry out vengeance upon him\u201d (4Q171 4.9\u201310). Both passages describe the Teacher of Righteousness escaping the plots of the Wicked Priest or, alternately, from the hand of the wicked of Manasseh and Ephraim.<br \/>\nA comparison of the Pesher Psalms passage with parallel statements in the Scrolls suggests that a straightforward interpretation is apposite: \u201cthe wicked of Ephraim and Manasseh\u201d refers to the Pharisees and the Sadducees, both of which persecuted the sect while the Teacher of Righteousness was alive, seeking\u2014but ultimately failing\u2014to \u201clay hands on the Priest and the members of his council.\u201d It would appear, then, that the Teacher of Righteousness was not killed, but rather died a natural death. The \u201cruthless nations\u201d in Pesher Psalms (2.20; 4.10) are most likely the Romans, though this is not the only possible interpretation. The author may be expressing his cruel wish that the Sadducees and Pharisees be handed over to Rome, but it is also possible these statements allude to past events from the trying times following Pompey\u2019s invasion of Israel. The most important piece of information is that both the Sadducees and the Pharisees persecuted the Teacher of Righteousness. It is unlikely that the Pharisees were able to attack anyone while they were persecuted by the Sadducee authorities, so the Teacher of Righteousness and his followers were subject to Pharisee persecution only from the time of the Pharisee rise to power. In other words, the Teacher of Righteousness was still alive during the reign of Alexandra Salome.<br \/>\nWe saw above that the Qumran scrolls describe the Pharisees as having used their hypocrisy and deceitful teachings to win over most of the Jewish populace: \u201cthe misleaders from Ephraim, who with their fraudulent teaching and lying tongue and perfidious lip misdirect many: kings, princes, priests and people together with the proselyte attached to them. Cities and clans will perish through their advice, nobles and leaders will fall [due to the fero]city of their tongues\u201d (Pesher Nahum 2.8\u201310). As a number of scholars have noted, \u201cthe rule of those looking for smooth interpretations\u201d\u2014that is, the Pharisee government during the reign of Alexandra Salome\u2014is portrayed very grimly. Though the pesher is composed under Roman rule, the Pharisees still wield great influence over the people, and the author can only hope for \u201cthe final time \u2026 when the glory of Judah is revealed\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.3\u20138). This section of Pesher Nahum does not recount historical recollections, but rather a fervent hope for what will yet transpire. The phrase \u201cfinal time\u201d is used in the Qumran literature to designate the end of the present eschatological epoch. Then will the \u201cglory of Judah\u201d be revealed, in other words, all will see that the Dead Sea community alone is legitimate and just. This hope, however, remained unfulfilled, just like the second wish of the Community\u2014that the Pharisees and their deleterious influence on the Jewish populace disappear altogether.<br \/>\nWe saw above that \u201cManasseh\u201d is mentioned in the Pesher to Psalm 37 (2.18\u201320), but it is only Pesher Nahum that provides insight into the nature of this group. If the Pharisees, \u201cEphraim,\u201d are portrayed as a religious community made up of dorshei halakot, whose deceiving teachers have misled the majority of the Jewish populace, the Sadducees, \u201cManasseh,\u201d are characterized by grandeur, honor, and a bellicose character. The Pesher (3.9) speaks of \u201cthe great men of Manasseh, the honorable [people who surround] Manasseh\u201d and further notes that the men of Manasseh are \u201cmighty warriors\u201d (3.11). These details remind us of the military leaders of Alexander Jannaeus, the Sadducee king, who went on to serve under his son, Aristobulus. And though the pesher refers to \u201cthe rule of those looking for smooth interpretations\u201d (2.4)\u2014the Pharisee reign under Alexandra Salome\u2014it actually has the \u201crule\u201d of Manasseh in mind. For Nahum 3:10, with its graphic description of military destruction, \u201cconcerns Manasseh, in the last time, in which his dominion over Israel will weaken [\u2026] his women, his children and his babies will go into captivity, his warriors and his honored ones [will perish] by the sword\u201d (4.3\u20134). The Qumran author speaks of the \u201cwarriors\u201d of Manasseh, even though the biblical verse does not mention warriors at all. What historical event is here invoked? Amusin is of the opinion that Pesher Nahum alludes to the persecution of the Sadducees, the allies of Alexander Jannaeus, by the hand of the now-dominant Pharisees under Alexandra Salome. Dupont-Sommer suggests that Pesher Nahum hints at the fate of Aristobulus and his followers in 63 B.C.E., when Pompey captured Aristobulus and his family, and his troops fell before the advancing Roman army. As noted, the Pesher was undoubtedly composed after the Roman conquest under Pompey, and the language of the passage in question seems to support Dupont-Sommer\u2019s view. Finally, the Pesher prophesies regarding \u201cthe wicked of Ephraim \u2026 whose cup will come after Manasseh\u201d (4.5\u20136). Dupont-Sommer takes this as a reference to the bitter end of Hyrcanus II, but as mentioned above (and we will return to this point in what follows), Pesher Nahum\u2019s account of the disappearance of the Pharisees represents a hope for the future\u2014never to be fulfilled.<br \/>\nThe publication of Pesher Nahum provides important details for Second Temple Jewish history. The Pesher confirms the general portrait found in Josephus concerning the internecine struggles during the days of the last Hasmonean priests, and provides new information regarding the history of the Essenes, about whom we knew next to nothing prior to the discovery of the Scrolls. We now know that the Essenes were persecuted both by the Pharisees and the Sadducees already from the time the Teacher of Righteousness founded the community. It stands to reason, then, that the Teacher of Righteousness lived under the Pharisee government\u2014the reign of Alexandra Salome\u2014and escaped the plottings of his enemies. Interestingly, Josephus describes the time of Pharisee rule in similar terms, even though he was a Pharisee himself, while the Essenes were sworn enemies of the Pharisees. Typically for the Scrolls, Pesher Nahum describes the Pharisees as a religious group that wields great influence over the Jewish populace, and this seems to be historically accurate. The Pesher characterizes them as hypocrites\u2014a charge echoed in other sources, including the Talmud. The Sadducees, in contrast, are described as warriors, again very much in keeping with Josephus\u2019s account of the reigns of Alexander Jannaeus and his son Aristobulus II. Of particular importance is the tribal typology: the Essenes are Judah, the Pharisees Ephraim, and the Sadducees Manasseh. This typology suggests a tripartite division within the Jewish people, precisely as Josephus says. In light of all this, it appears this division reflects the historical reality of the day and is not a product of Josephus\u2019s literary imagination.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>G. E. Lessing, the 18th century German writer, is best known for his literary work, including the play \u201cNathan the Wise.\u201d Few people know that he was also an important scholar of early Christianity. In one of his theological tractates, Lessing writes that the Jews interpret Scripture in various ways and believe that different interpretations may be equally valid. Every verse, in fact, is open to various readings. Lessing is undoubtedly overstating his case. It is true that there is a wide range of possible interpretations in Judaism, but each approach is bound by certain rules, rules that are determined by the biblical text, on the one hand, and the clues that guide the reader\u2019s search for deeper truths within the text, on the other.<br \/>\nThe first column of Pesher Nahum nicely demonstrates that despite the relative freedom enjoyed by Jewish interpreters, the interpretation itself responds to elements found within the biblical text itself. Thus Nahum 2:12\u201314 refers to a lion\u2019s den, to which the lion brings prey for his whelps with impunity. Already the Targum understood that this lion\u2019s den, which will soon feel God\u2019s wrath, is a symbol for Nineveh and its kings. Pesher Nahum too understands the words of the prophet as a symbolic reference to kings and rulers. Thus, both the Targum and the Qumran authors interpret the lion\u2019s prey as \u201cwealth\u201d (Pesher Nahum 1.11), or as \u201cloot\u201d and \u201cgoods\u201d (Targum to Nahum 2:13 and 2:14, respectively). Unlike the Aramaic translator, however, the Qumran interpretation takes Nahum\u2019s account of the lion as a unit unto itself, divorced from the question of Nineveh. Moreover, the pesher provides a detailed account of Nahum\u2019s prophetic words, interpreting them as an account of the lives of contemporary kings.<br \/>\nIn the following chapter, Nahum speaks openly of Nineveh, prophesying its downfall. The fate of this \u201ccity of bloodshed\u201d will recall the past conquest of Amon, that is, Thebes: \u201cAre you better than Amon that sat surrounded by rivers?\u201d (Nah. 3:8). The author of Pesher Nahum follows the prophet\u2019s lead, but transforms the two cities into symbols for the leading Jewish parties of his day: Nineveh is the city of Ephraim, of \u201cthose looking for smooth interpretations\u201d (Pesher Nahum 2.2)\u2014i.e., the Pharisees\u2014while \u201cAmon is Manasseh\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.9), i.e., the Sadducees. If, then, the prophet foresees that Nineveh will fall just as Amon fell, our author reads this as an indication that the Pharisees will meet their end, just as the Sadducees met theirs. The dominion of Manasseh has already weakened (Pesher Nahum 4.3), but in the future it will be \u201cthe wicked of Ephraim \u2026 whose cup will come after Manasseh\u201d (Pesher Nahum 4.5\u20136). The pesher, then, offers a consistent typological interpretation of the two cities: when Nahum turns away from Amon to discuss Nineveh (Nah. 3:11), the author of the pesher likewise ends his discussion of the Sadducee \u201cManasseh\u201d and turns to the \u201cwicked of Ephraim.\u201d<br \/>\nPesher Nahum contains, then, a two-fold typological model. One is the tribal typology that is known from other Qumran texts, according to which the Qumran community is Judah and its enemies are the northern kingdom of Israel: the Pharisees are Ephraim, the Sadducees Manasseh. The other, dictated by the biblical words of Nahum, identifies the Pharisees with Nineveh and the Sadducees with Amon. The Qumran community often describes itself as an edifice or a temple, and as \u201ca fortified city\u201d (1QHa 14.25). Pesher Isaiah to 54:11\u201312 (\u201cI am about to set your stones in antimony, and lay your foundations with sapphires. I will make your pinnacles of rubies, your gates of jewels, and all your wall of precious stones\u201d) assumes that the prophet\u2019s description of eschatological Jerusalem is in fact a symbol of God\u2019s chosen group, that is, the Essenes. The same logic guides the author of 11QMelchizedek, who interprets Isaiah 52:7 (\u201cWho says to Zion, \u2018your God reigns\u2019&nbsp;\u201d) as referring to \u201cthose who establish the covenant, those who avoid walking on the path of the people\u201d (11QMelch 2.24\u201325). We have already encountered such language, which characterizes the Qumran community as breaking with the Jewish society of the day; eschatological Zion too, then, symbolizes the Essenes in 11QMelchizedek. The typological association of the community with Jerusalem is easily understood as a conflation of the edifice and city symbolism prevalent in the Qumran writings, with their self-identity as the kingdom of Judah. The combination of the two would seem to indicate that the Qumran community ought to be seen as the chief city of Judah, as holy Jerusalem herself. The identification of the sect with Jerusalem is not attested in the extant text of Pesher Nahum, though it is possible that it was made in some of the now lost parts of the composition. In any case, it is clear that if Nineveh symbolizes the Pharisees, and Amon the Sadducees, then the Essenes can only be symbolized by Jerusalem.<br \/>\nIn the symbolic vocabulary of Qumran, the Teacher of Righteousness is the community\u2019s founder, \u201cthe priest, the Teacher of Righteousness, whom God chose to stand \u2026 he installed him to found the congregation\u201d (4QPsa 3.15\u201316). His counterpart is the \u201cfounder\u201d of the Pharisees, the Preacher of Deceit. The prophet Habakkuk cries out, \u201cAlas for you who build a city on bloodshed and found a city on iniquity. Is it not from the Lord of hosts that peoples labor only to feed the flames, and nations weary themselves for nothing?\u201d (Hab. 2:12\u201313), and the Qumran author glosses these words as follows: \u201cThe interpretation of the word concerns the Preacher of Deceit, who has misdirected many, building a useless city with blood and erecting a community with deceit for his own glory, wearing out many by useless work and teaching them acts of deceit, so that their labors are for nothing; so that those who derided and insulted God\u2019s chosen will go to the punishment of fire\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 10.9\u201313). The pesher clearly interprets the building of \u201ca city on bloodshed\u201d as reference to the establishment of a false community. The image of laboring \u201cfor nothing\u201d recurs in other Qumran texts, consistently in reference to the Pharisees (Hodayot 15.34; 10.22).<br \/>\nThe phrase \u201cyou who build a city on bloodshed\u201d in Habakkuk 2:12 is very similar to the words of Nahum (3:1): \u201cAh, city of bloodshed, utterly deceitful, full of booty.\u201d Pesher Nahum has strong linguistic grounds to interpret \u201ccity of bloodshed\u201d as referring to the Pharisees: \u201cIts interpretation: it is the city of Ephraim, those looking for smooth interpretations, in the final days, since they walk in treachery and lies\u201d (Pesher Nahum 2.2). It should be noted that while the Sadducees (i.e. \u201cManasseh\u201d) are also identified with a city\u2014Amon, that is, Thebes\u2014the Scrolls do not describe them as a congregation. Pesher Nahum speaks of the great men and the honorable men of Manasseh, and also of the dominion of Manasseh, but never of their teachings or their sages. It may well be that the Sadducees were not a full-fledged religious congregation in the mold of the Pharisees and the Essenes, but more of a political party. Their religious positions undoubtedly carried some weight, but it appears the Qumran community did not find it necessary to engage these positions overtly. This may be due to the factors mentioned above, and also to the relatively minor influence of the Sadducees on Jewish society as a whole.<br \/>\nThough Pesher Nahum does not define the Sadducees as a religious congregation (rightly, it seems), it nonetheless employs city symbolism in discussing them. Historically, the position of the author of Pesher Nahum toward the Pharisees and the Sadducees is akin to that of Nahum toward Assyria and Egypt: Amon had already fallen, just as the Sadducees had been laid low\u2014their \u201cinfants were dashed in pieces at the head of every street; lots were cast for her nobles, all her dignitaries were bound in fetters\u201d (Pesher Nahum 4.1\u20134). And just as the biblical prophet looked toward the future fall of Nineveh, so too the Essene author rejoices at the prospects of the Pharisees\u2019 decline. The key difference, of course, is that the biblical prophecy came to pass, but not that of Pesher Nahum. The moment when \u201cthe glory of Judah is revealed\u201d never came, the Pharisees never disappeared, and the people did not abandon the Pharisee misleaders and align themselves with the Essenes.<br \/>\nThe hopes of the Qumran community were ultimately dashed, but the details of their eschatological vision concerning the end of the Pharisees are fascinating, both as a reflection of the spirit of Second Temple Judaism, and as an element of the Qumran eschatology. Consider Pesher Nahum\u2019s statement in this regard: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018They will say: Nineveh is devastated; who will bemoan her? Where shall I seek comforters for you?\u2019 (Nah. 3:6\u20137): Its interpretation concerns those looking for smooth interpretations, whose council will die and whose society will be disbanded; they shall not continue misdirecting the assembly and simple folk shall no longer support their council\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.6\u20138).<br \/>\nHow, then, does the author envision the end of days, when \u201cthe glory of Judah is revealed\u201d and the single abiding truth of the Essene community will be made known to all, in accordance with the will of God? Many of the Jewish commoners will realize that they erred in their blind obedience to the Pharisees, and turn away from those who misdirected them. Then the Pharisees\u2019 \u201ccouncil will die\u201d and their society \u201cwill be disbanded.\u201d Ultimately, the congregation of those who look for smooth interpretations will cease to exist. Interestingly, the Pesher uses the same terminology for the Pharisees as for the Qumran community: \u2018congregation\u2019 (\u05e2\u05d3\u05d4), \u2018assembly\u2019 (\u05e7\u05d4\u05dc), \u2018council\u2019 (\u05e2\u05e6\u05d4), and \u2018assembly\u2019 (\u05db\u05e0\u05e1\u05ea). Outside of \u201ccouncil\u201d in the sense of congregation, which is otherwise unattested in the Scrolls, these terms are not particular to the Essenes, but rather appear to be part of the common Second Temple lexicon for religious congregations.<br \/>\nThe section describing the downfall of the Pharisees in the end of days includes another set of technical terminology, which may shed light on the social reality of Second Temple Judaism. The Essene author proclaims, \u201cwhen the glory of Judah is revealed the simple people of Ephraim will flee from among their assembly and desert the ones who misdirected them and will join the majority of Israel.\u201d After the Pharisees pass from the world, \u201cthey shall not continue misdirecting the assembly and simple folk shall no longer support their council\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.4\u20138). Who are these \u201csimple folk\u201d (\u05e4\u05ea\u05d0\u05d9\u05dd)? The Hebrew term appears a number of times throughout the Scrolls in reference to the Qumran members, indicating their simple faith. Thus the author of the Hodayot writes: \u201cI became a trap for offenders, but a medicine for all who turn away from offense, a wit for simple folk, and a staunch purpose for the timorous at heart\u201d (1QHa 10.8\u20139). However, the word has a technical sense as well, as when Pesher Habakkuk interprets Habakkuk 2:17 (\u201cFor the violence done to Lebanon will overwhelm you; the destruction of the animals will terrify you\u201d) as: \u201cBecause Lebanon is the Council of the Community and the animals are the simple folk of Judah, those who observe the Law\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 12.3\u20135). The \u2018Council of the Community\u2019 refers to the Qumran community and its organizing principles, and alongside it are the \u2018simple folk of Judah, those who observe the law\u2019 (the Qumran gloss of \u2018the animals\u2019 in the biblical verse). We established above that Judah is a typological name for the Essene movement; thus the \u2018simple folk of Judah\u2019 are individuals who \u201cobserve the Law,\u201d i.e. the Torah according to the Essene interpretation, but are not part of the \u201cCouncil of the Community\u201d and do not obey its special ordinances. Particularly relevant is the very poorly preserved passage from Pesher Micah: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018I shall make Samaria a heap in the open country, a place for planting vineyards\u2019 (Mic. 1:6). Its interpretation concerns the Preacher of Deceit who has misdirected the simple folk. \u2018And what is the high place of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem?\u2019 (Mic. 1:5). Its interpretation concerns the Teacher of Righteousness who teaches the law to his council and to all those volunteering to join the chosen of God, observing the law in the council of the Community, those who will be saved on the day of judgment\u201d (1QpMic [= 1Q14] fragments 8\u201310).<br \/>\nThis passage reflects a picture already attested elsewhere in the Scrolls: two communities face each other\u2014the Pharisees led by the Preacher of Deceit, and the Essenes led by the Teacher of Righteousness. Both are symbolized by cities\u2014Samaria for the Pharisees, who are called \u2018Ephraim\u2019 (and \u201cthe head of Ephraim is Samaria\u201d [Isa. 7:9]), while Jerusalem, the Judean capital, is the symbol of the Essenes, who refer to themselves as the house of Jerusalem. The pesher takes Micah\u2019s words \u201cI shall make Samaria a heap in the open country, a place for planting vineyards\u201d and applies them to the Preacher of Deceit. It is possible that there is a play on the Hebrew phrase \u201cgrape vineyards\u201d (\u05de\u05d8\u05e2\u05d9 \u05db\u05e8\u05dd) and the homonymous root \u05ea\u05be\u05e2\u05be\u05d4, to mislead or misdirect. Pesher Nahum speaks of the Pharisees who \u201cmisdirect Ephraim\u201d (2.8; and see also 3.7; Pesher Hosea 2.5; CD 5.20), while Pesher Habakkuk states explicitly that the Preacher of Deceit \u201cmisdirected the many\u201d (10.9; and see also CD 1.14\u201315). It would appear, then, that the reconstruction of Pesher Micah as \u201cthe Preacher of Deceit who has misdirected the simple folk\u201d is indeed warranted. The Preacher of Deceit misdirected Israel (the vineyard being a common symbol for Israel, following Isaiah 5:7).<br \/>\nWe already know the \u201csimple folk\u201d of Pesher Micah from Pesher Nahum; they make up the majority of the Jewish people who, while not part of the Pharisees proper, obey their rulings. The author of Pesher Nahum believes that in the end of days the Pharisees \u201cshall not continue misdirecting the assembly and simple folk shall no longer support their council\u201d (3.7\u20138), and then \u201cthe simple people of Ephraim will flee from among their assembly and desert the ones who misdirected them and will join the majority of Israel\u201d (3.5).<br \/>\nPesher Micah, then, sets Samaria, the evil kingdom of the north that is the symbol of the Pharisees and the Preacher of Deceit, against Jerusalem, the congregation of the Teacher of Righteousness. The latter are, he suggests, the true subject of Micah 1:5: \u201cAnd what is the high place of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem?\u201d For Pesher Micah, \u201cIts interpretation concerns the Teacher of Righteousness who teaches the law to his Council and all those volunteering to join the chosen of God, observing the law in the Council of the Community, those who will be saved from the day of judgment\u201d (Pesher Micah fragments 8\u201310). Milik, who edited Pesher Micah, rightly refers to a parallel passage in Pesher Habakkuk, interpreting Habakkuk 2:17\u2014\u201cFor the violence done to Lebanon will overwhelm you; the destruction of the animals will terrify you\u201d\u2014as follows: \u201cBecause Lebanon is the Council of the Community and the animals are the simple folk of Judah, those who observe the Law\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 12.4\u20135). It appears that Pesher Micah offers related readings of two terms in Micah 1:5. \u201cJerusalem\u201d refers to the Council of the Community, while \u201cthe high place of Judah\u201d refers to \u201call those volunteering to join the chosen of God \u2026 in the Council of the Community.\u201d The volunteers here clearly refer to individual supporters of the Qumran community who are not current members but might become members at a future time. The term \u2018volunteers\u2019 appears in the Scrolls in a number of different meanings. The Manual of Discipline echoes the sense of Pesher Micah when it speaks of \u201canyone from Israel who freely volunteers to enroll in the Council of the Community\u201d (6.13\u201314), that is, people located outside the sect but considering membership. (See also \u201cthose who freely volunteer,\u201d 1QS 1.7, 11.) We find, then, a clear correlation between Pesher Habakkuk 12.1\u20135, on the one hand, and Pesher Micah, on the other. Pesher Micah interprets \u201cthe high place of Judah\u201d as \u201call those volunteering to join the chosen of God \u2026 in the Council of the Community,\u201d while Pesher Habakkuk interprets \u201canimals\u201d in Habakkuk as \u201cthe simple folk of Judah, those who observe the Law.\u201d These constitute a distinct group from \u201cLebanon which is the Council of the Community.\u201d Indeed, both these passages appear to make up a single midrashic interpretation, and it\u2019s possible that other points of contact existed, but cannot be recovered due to the poor condition of Pesher Micah. Be that as it may, both the fragmentary Pesher Micah and Pesher Habakkuk speak of two affiliated groups\u2014the structured sect, \u201cthe Council of the Community,\u201d and those who are not full members.<br \/>\nThose \u201cvolunteering\u201d for the congregation of the Teacher of Righteousness in Pesher Micah are the \u201csimple folk of Judah\u201d discussed in Pesher Habakkuk. However, Pesher Micah explicitly links the \u201csimple folk\u201d with the Preacher of Deceit, the leader of the Pharisees, suggesting these are the \u201csimple folk of Ephraim\u201d mentioned in Pesher Nahum (3.5, and see also 3.7). It appears, then, that the Qumran authors saw the Pharisee movement as paralleling its own: both the Pharisees and the Essenes were made up of a religious congregation and of its supporters. Its own \u201csimple folk of Judah\u201d are also referred to as those \u201cwho accompany,\u201d as when the Damascus Document describes \u201cthe converts of Israel who left the land of Judah, and those who accompany them\u201d (CD 4.2\u20133). The Essene movement is described in the Manual of Discipline as a structured group of \u201cthose who freely volunteer for holiness in Aaron and for the house of truth in Israel and \u2026 those who join them for community, lawsuit, and judgment to proclaim as guilty all those who trespass the decree\u201d\u2014again, the full members and those who join them (1QS 5.5\u20137).<br \/>\nIt was the structural parallel between the two movements that allowed the Qumran authors to transfer the technical term \u201csimple folk\u201d from the Essenes to their Pharisee rivals. The former were the \u201csimple folk of Judah,\u201d the latter the \u201csimple folk of Ephraim.\u201d True, the phrase does not have a precise parallel within the Pharisaic-rabbinic corpus, but it is employed by the Scrolls to mark the Pharisees, not only the Essenes.<br \/>\nIt is well established that both the Pharisaic and the Essene movement were centered around a particular group, who maintained a fixed way of life and various purity strictures. The Pharisees numbered some 6000 members, the Essenes 4000. However, there were significant differences between the two congregations. The religious legislation of the Essenes reflected the centrality of the Yahad, the sectarian community, and its separatist ideology. As a result, the \u201csimple folk of Judah\u201d are ultimately nothing more than fellow travelers. Ideally, all those who volunteer to join the community will become members of the Council of the Community (as in Pesher Micah), which explains the requirement that every member of the Qumran community \u201cwelcome those who freely volunteer to carry out God\u2019s decrees into the covenant of kindness, in order to be united in the council of God\u201d (1QS 1.7\u20138). The Pharisees, in contrast, were not a separatist or missionary community, but rather sought to influence the Jewish people as a whole. This tendency is evidenced by the polemic attack of Qumran writers against the Pharisees as \u201cmisleaders from Ephraim\u201d who lead astray the people as a whole (see especially Pesher Nahum 2.7\u201310). Given this historical context, we cannot but wonder to whom the Scrolls refer when they speak of \u201cthe simple folk of Ephraim\u201d? The term that most closely parallels \u201cthe simple folk\u201d in rabbinic literature is am ha-aretz, often translated as \u2018ignoramus\u2019 or \u2018unlearned.\u2019 It can be used to identify an individual who is not a sage, but it also means one who is not a member of the Pharisee community, and it is in the latter sense that it approximates Qumran\u2019s \u201csimple folk,\u201d i.e., individuals who accept the community but are not part of it. Was this the only distinction invoked by the term \u201csimple folk of Ephraim,\u201d or does it have a broader sense that includes the distinction between the am ha-aretz and the Pharisee sage? It appears that the author of Pesher Nahum had this aspect in mind too, as he writes that in the last days \u201cwhen the glory of Judah is revealed the simple people of Ephraim will flee from among their assembly and desert the ones who misdirected them\u201d (Pesher Nahum 3.4). The simple folk will, in other words, break with the Pharisee sages. In any case, historically speaking the \u201csimple folk of Ephraim\u201d constituted the vast majority of Jewish society\u2014sympathetic to the teachings of the Pharisees, and thus they could be referred to with the unmarked \u201csimple folk\u201d (as in Pesher Nahum 3.7 and Pesher Micah).<br \/>\nThus far, we have concentrated on the Essene prophecy regarding the end of Pharisee influence within the broader context of Pharisee-Essene relations in Second Temple times. However, part of the prophecy provides fascinating insights into the eschatological teachings of the Qumran community. One of the central doctrines of the community posits that the world is divided into the lot of light and the lot of darkness, and an accompanying desire to destroy the evil\u2014indeed, evil itself\u2014in the end of days. The dualism of good and evil, along with the belief in predestination, is the foundation of Qumran\u2019s separatist ideology, an ideology that finds expression in the very structure of this community that seeks to set itself apart from Jewish society. It is no surprise, then, that the Qumran authors would promote the idea that in the end of days all the wicked Jews, i.e., those who do not belong to the community, will be destroyed: \u201c\u2026 for futile are those who do not know the covenant. And all those who scorn his word he shall cause to vanish from the world\u201d (1QS 5.19). However, the sect\u2019s ideology could be understood in a more radical fashion, as arguing that some of the Jewish population may not have been predestined into either the lot of light or the lot of darkness, but rather has been misled by the wicked and may yet repent and be saved. It may be in this context that the Scrolls speak of those who misdirect the people, a phrase that invariably points to the Pharisees and their leadership. Thus the Hodayot speak of those who seek after smooth interpretations: \u201cYou placed \u2026 the source of knowledge for all those who understand, but they have changed them for an uncircumcised lip and a weird tongue of a people without understanding, and so they will be ruined by their mistake\u201d (1QHa 10.18\u201319). Pesher Nahum speaks in the same vein of \u201ctheir fraudulent teaching\u201d (Pesher Nahum 2.8\u201310). The author then goes on to enumerate the various social strata that have been misled by the Pharisees and their fraudulent teaching, beginning with kings and moving all the way down to \u201cthe proselyte attached to them.\u201d If a significant percentage of the Jewish populace is merely victims of these misleaders, in the future time, when the truth will be revealed, the cheated masses will abandon their erroneous ways and join with the Qumran community. I take this to be almost certainly the original view of the sect. For it was ever thus in separatist movements: one tendency seeks to break with the majority, eventually transforming the religious movement into a sectarian group, alongside a second tendency to convince the majority that this new movement represents the only true interpretation of the religion as a whole. One of the key factors in the formation of a new religious group is the belief that its views will eventually be accepted by their co-religionists. However, their failure to convince the majority of their views is, so to speak, a fecund tragedy, at least when the separatist elements in the movement are strong and represent a novel ideological perspective. The theological dualism of the Qumran community, so clearly evident in the doctrine of predestination, paved the way for its break with broader Jewish society. However, unlike Christianity which turned toward the Pagan world, the Qumran community never fully divorced itself from the Jewish people. We may assume, then, that the desire to convince mainstream Judaism (or part of it) engendered stronger pan-Jewish feelings in the early days of the Qumran community, feelings that weakened as it grew clearer that the group had failed to establish itself as a dominant force in the Jewish world. Nonetheless, even when the group separated itself physically, it did not cease to hope that eventually, even the Jewish masses who could not accept the strictures of life at Qumran would join the Essene movement. After all, they knew empirically that there were \u201csimple folk of Judah, those who observe the law\u201d who could not attain the religious observance of Qumran members, but still were sympathetic to the movement. Thus, even while stating that \u201cfutile are those who do not know the covenant,\u201d the very same section describes the Essene movement as \u201ca foundation of truth for Israel \u2026 [to] make atonement for all who freely volunteer \u2026 and for those who join them \u2026\u201d (1QS 5.5\u20137). The same putative dichotomy is set forth (albeit in milder terms) in Pesher Psalms, which speaks of \u201call who converted to the law, who do not refuse to convert from their wickedness, for all those who resist to convert from their sin will be cut off\u201d (4QpPsa 2.4\u20135). But while this does not mean that only the members of the community will be counted among those who \u201cconvert,\u201d there is a clear tension between this statement and later language concerning \u201cthe congregation of his chosen ones who will be chiefs and princes \u2026\u201d of Israel (4QpPsa 3.5).<br \/>\nThere are, then, two distinct aspects to Qumran eschatology. One position holds that ultimate redemption applies only to the Qumran community itself, while the other describes the redemption of all non-wicked Jews. The latter will turn away from their wrongdoings, recognize the truth of the Qumran teachings, and live under the rule of the community. This is the view promulgated in the Rule of the Congregation, as it is \u201cthe rule of all the congregation of Israel in the final days, when they gather in community to walk in accordance with the regulation of the sons of Zadok, the priests, and the men of their covenant\u201d (1QSa [= 1Q28a] 1.1\u20132). This is also the approach of Pesher Nahum, who provides a fuller social picture of the eschatological hopes outlined in the Rule of the Congregation. Pesher Nahum does not discuss the fate that will befall the Sadducees in the end of days, perhaps because they are relatively few. We do, however, learn that the Pharisees will disintegrate, losing all popular support once their wicked deeds are made known. \u201cWhen the glory of Judah\u201d\u2014that is, of the Qumran community\u2014\u201cis revealed,\u201d the simple folk of Ephraim will turn away from those who misled them and join with the true Israel. Clearly, this series of events accords with a pan-Jewish approach (at least as far as the future is concerned), since not only the simple folk of Judah, but those of Ephraim as well will side with the community. The author of the Rule of the Congregation was, it seems, acutely aware of the tension between the present separatism and the future integration, and so he presents the composition as dealing with \u201call the congregation of Israel in the final days,\u201d a time when all will \u201cwalk in accordance with the regulation of the sons of Zadok, the priests, and the men of their covenant.\u201d If the Qumran community departed from the path of the people, choosing instead to maintain their covenant with God despite the surrounding depravity, in the future the members of the community will be the chiefs and princes of the Jewish people as a whole, now purified of evil.<\/p>\n<p>V<\/p>\n<p>We have seen, then, that the Scrolls verify that there were three main parties in Second Temple Judaism: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. But while Josephus describes them as philosophical schools, the Qumran writings classify the three in accordance with a scripturally based typology. Thus the Essenes are \u201cthe house of Judah,\u201d that is, the portion of Israel that remained faithful to the Lord, while their enemies are described as the two main tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel: the Pharisees Ephraim and the Sadducees Manasseh. Alongside this view we find another typological vocabulary in which the groups are likened to cities. The Qumran community was, needless to say, Jerusalem, the capital of Judah. The Pharisees, conversely, are identified in Pesher Micah with Samaria, the capital of Ephraim, while Pesher Nahum identifies the Pharisees with Nineveh and the Sadducees with Amon (Thebes), cities discussed in the words of the prophet.<br \/>\nThe use of Jerusalem as a symbol in the Essene writings is of particular interest since the early church too defined itself symbolically as Jerusalem. In Pesher Micah, we identified the typological association of Jerusalem with the Council of the Community founded by the Teacher of Righteousness, while Pesher Isaiah links an interpretation concerning Jerusalem in the eschaton to the Essene community (Isaiah 54:11\u201312). Another important passage comes in the very end of 11Q13 (11QMelchizedek), in which the eschatological Zion prophecy of Isaiah 52:7 is read as an allusion to the Dead Sea sect.<br \/>\nElsewhere, I have discussed the great importance of Pesher Isaiah 54:11\u201312 to understanding the Christian institution of the twelve apostles. Here the key issue is that the author interprets Isaiah\u2019s words regarding eschatological Jerusalem as reference to existing or future institutions of the Qumran community in the end of days. Thus Isaiah\u2019s \u201c[I will] lay your foundations with sapphires\u201d is interpreted as \u201cthey will found the council of the Community\u201d and later the fragmentary text refers to the priests and to \u201cthe assembly of their elect, like a sapphire stone in the midst of stones\u201d (4Q164 1.3). Similarly the phrase \u201c[I will make] all your wall of precious stones\u201d is taken to refer to \u201cthe chiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d This fragment is poorly preserved and not sufficiently clear, but enough has survived to demonstrate that the interpretation is based on the twofold approach of the community: representing the community as an edifice or a city, and they typologically linking it to Jerusalem, the Holy City. These views converge in interpreting Isaiah\u2019s prophecies concerning the different elements of eschatological Jerusalem as symbols for the institutions of the community.<br \/>\nThe Jerusalem typology of Qumran generally, and the interpretation of Pesher Isaiah in particular, are illuminated by the description of eschatological Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation. Here, the author sees \u201cthe holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God. It has the glory of God and a radiance like a very rare jewel, like jasper, clear as crystal. It has a great, high wall with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates are inscribed the names of the twelve tribes of the Israelites.\u2026 And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb\u201d (Rev. 21:10\u201314). The foundation stones of the city, moreover, are studded with the same precious stones that adorn the breastplate of the high priest (Rev. 21:19\u201321). The symbols point to an eschatological vision of Jerusalem, with its twelve tribes, while the reference to the foundation stones bearing the names of the twelve apostles clearly indicates that eschatological Jerusalem symbolizes the Christian community in the end of days. This is further demonstrated by the fact that Jerusalem of the eschaton, as described in Revelation, is betrothed as a wife to the Lamb, that is, to Jesus Christ (Rev. 21:2, 9), just as Knesset Israel, the Community of Israel, is represented in rabbinic literature as the beloved of God. It is worth noting that the apocryphal 4 Ezra (9:38\u201310:28) contains the figure of a grieving woman who eventually turns into a city\u2014Zion, that is, the eschatological Jerusalem (10:40\u201349). In 4 Ezra, however, the woman, i.e., eschatological Jerusalem, has no typological meaning.<br \/>\nWe have already noted that both the Qumran community and the early church link the city as a symbol of the community with the typology of \u201ccongregation-edifice.\u201d This view finds expression, e.g., in Paul\u2019s epistle to the Ephesians (2:19\u201322): \u201cSo then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. In him the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built together spiritually into a dwelling-place for God.\u201d Though never stated explicitly, it is clear that city in Ephesians is Jerusalem in the end of days, the \u201cheavenly\u201d city. It should be further noted that the passage in question combines the two key aspects of the city: on the one hand, it is a symbol of the community, on the other, the residence of the Christian select, who are its citizens. A very similar situation holds in Revelation, where the wondrous vision of eschatological Jerusalem takes center stage, while the symbolic allusions to the Christian community merge seamlessly into this portrait. The belief in a new and wondrous Jerusalem is already found among the biblical prophets, and continues in the apocalyptic literature of the Second Temple and down to the rabbinic corpus. It is not surprising then, that alongside the early church, the Qumranites used eschatological Jerusalem to symbolize their community. A number of the Scrolls contain detailed descriptions of the new Jerusalem, though these are not symbolic so much as explicit visions of the eschaton.<br \/>\nAnother important passage that combines an apocalyptic vision with the typological import of heavenly Jerusalem is Hebrews 12:18\u201324. Here Paul addresses his Christian readers, saying that they have not been part of the awesome events of Mt. Sinai, but rather \u201cyou have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant.\u201d The terminology used to describe Mt. Zion and heavenly Jerusalem is clearly apocalyptic. Nonetheless, the author of the epistle speaks enthusiastically of a divine community made up of angels and men alike. We have already noted that Pesher Micah compares the Essenes to Jerusalem and that the pesher to Isaiah 54:11\u201312 interprets the biblical prophecy of eschatological Jerusalem as referring to the Qumran community. The same is true of 11QMelchizedek, which describes a trial that will take place in the end of days: Melchizedek will be the judge and he will \u201ccarry out the vengeance of God\u2019s judgments \u2026 [and] to his aid shall come all the gods of [justice]\u201d (11Q13 2.13\u201314). The elect are \u201cthe sons of light \u2026 the men of the lot of Melchizedek\u201d (11Q13 2.8). The author then interprets Isaiah 52:7\u2014\u201cwho says to Zion \u2018your god reigns\u2019&nbsp;\u201d\u2014as applying to these elect. \u201cZion is \u2026 those who establish the covenant, those who avoid walking on the path of the people\u201d (11Q13 2.23\u201324).<br \/>\nWho is this figure, whom the text associates with the phrase \u201cyour god\u201d? This daring interpretation attributes to Melchizedek the verse \u201cgod has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgment\u201d (Ps. 82:1). It appears, then, that those scholars are in the right who hold that \u201cyour god\u201d in Isaiah 52:7 is also interpreted as signifying Melchizedek, the heavenly judge of all creatures in the end of days. This hypothesis becomes well nigh definite if we recall that the biblical Melchizedek was the king of Salem, traditionally associated with Jerusalem or Zion, of whom Isaiah states \u201cwho says to Zion \u2018your god reigns\u2019&nbsp;\u201d (Isa. 52:7). For it is \u201cZion\u201d that is interpreted as \u201cthose who establish the covenant, those who avoid walking on the path of the people,\u201d that is, as the Essene sect itself. Indeed, we have already seen that the phrase \u201cavoid walking on the path of the people\u201d defines the separatist tendency within Qumran. The Qumran community, then, is Zion, which will, in the end of days\u2014apparently after the final judgment in which evil will be defeated\u2014be ruled by Melchizedek, King of Salem. The latter, it should be noted, is represented in the text as something of a \u201cson of man,\u201d both human and superhuman.<br \/>\nThe fragmentary condition of the Melchizedek passage precludes unequivocal conclusions regarding the image of Zion as the Community. Thus, there is no way to determine just how similar this image is to that found in the Epistle to the Hebrews. Nonetheless, both Hebrews and the Qumran author call eschatological Jerusalem \u2018Zion,\u2019 and it may be significant that both texts refer to the covenants that constitute the respective communities\u2014both of which are famously referred to as \u2018new covenants\u2019 or \u2018new testaments,\u2019 following Jeremiah 31:31. Already the words of the prophet contain the idea that this new covenant is to be the eschatological replacement of the first, Sinaitic covenant made by God and Israel. And this is indeed the meaning of \u2018new covenant\u2019 in the early church and the Damascus Document (CD 1.1\u201311; 2.14\u20133.21; 9.20\u201310.3). The dual covenant theology explains the discussion of Sinai in Hebrews 12:18\u201324, where he turns to his audience and states that they no longer need the awesome elements of the Sinai theophany, since the new testament of Christ contains no fear and trembling, but only glad tidings. Though not mentioned explicitly, Sinai here symbolizes the old covenant, while Mt. Zion and heavenly Jerusalem\u2014the new.<br \/>\nWe know that both the Christians and the Essenes distinguished between the first covenant at Sinai and the new covenant that constituted their respective communities. We have further seen that both groups saw Jerusalem and Mt. Zion as symbols of their communities. And though none of the Qumran texts published thus far ties the Zion or Jerusalem typology with the two covenants by associating the first with Mt. Sinai and the second with Mt. Zion, it is quite possible that the Essenes did, in typical fashion, link the two. Indeed, the early church may have inherited these images from the Essenes and developed them in their own particular manner. Support for this view is found in Paul\u2019s letter to the Galatians 4:21\u201331, which contains the same images as Hebrews 12:18\u201324, but in a distinctly Pauline reworking. The Epistle to the Hebrews was not composed by Paul, and there is evidence to suggest that some of the theological motifs common to the Pauline epistles, the other New Testament epistles, and the Gospel of John\u2014originate in the theological worldview of the Essenes.<br \/>\nIn his campaign to keep Gentile followers of Jesus from observing the Jewish commandments, Paul writes to the Galatians, \u201cit is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free woman. One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother.\u2026 Now you, my friends, are children of the promise, like Isaac \u2026 we are children, not of the slave but of the free woman\u201d (Gal. 4:22\u201331).<br \/>\nWe have cited this passage at length in order to emphasize Paul\u2019s complex symbolism, and to draw attention to the extreme conclusions he draws regarding the Torah from a conceptual framework that was, it appears, originally Essene. As in the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its softer tone towards the Torah, Paul situates Mt. Sinai and the heavenly Jerusalem as symbols of the old and new covenants, respectively. We have already noted that Jerusalem serves as a symbol of congregation first for the Qumran community and then for the nascent church. In Galatians, Paul notes explicitly that he is referring to the heavenly Jerusalem, not the terrestrial city. True, his opposition to Jerusalem revolves around the tension between mainstream Jewish society, which does not believe in Jesus, and the young Christian community. But for the Qumran community too Jerusalem is the base of their enemies, the Wicked Priest, the Angry Lion, and those who seek after smooth interpretations, along with the impure temple. For this group too, then, it is not the existing city of their day that is an ideal, but only the symbolic or typological Jerusalem; in two of the three passages discussed\u2014Pesher Isaiah and 11QMelchizedek\u2014it is eschatological Jerusalem that stands as a symbol. Overall, then, we find that heavenly Jerusalem plays a role in the eschatological schemata of both the Qumranites and the New Testament.<br \/>\nWe have addressed the complex typologies of Hebrews and Galatians, and their similarity to the Essene typology. We have also identified a great similarity in the descriptions of Jerusalem found in Revelation 21 and Pesher Isaiah. It is significant in this context that the heavenly Jerusalem of Revelation 21 is also the bride of the lamb, that is, a female symbol of the Christian community and a key to the symbolic language of Galatians. The personification of women as cities is an established motif in the Hebrew Bible: Jerusalem is, of course, the daughter of Zion or the maiden of Zion, but cities like Babylon and Nineveh are described as whores and the like. The same approach transforms Jerusalem into a female figure in 4 Ezra, and\u2014given the typological identification of Jerusalem and the congregation\u2014the woman symbolizes the congregation, as in Revelation. Thus, Paul\u2019s teachings to the Galatian community\u2014Mt. Sinai \u201cin Arabia\u201d is likened to Hagar, the maidservant, while Zion, i.e., heavenly Jerusalem, is Sarah the free woman\u2014are an original reworking of a symbolic vocabulary attested in the Scrolls and in Second Temple Jewish sources more generally. It is true that Paul uses the technical Greek term \u2018allegory\u2019 to characterize his interpretation, and absent contemporary Jewish sources we might think that this was an instance of Greek allegory; however the non-Greek Jewish parallels teach us that Paul\u2019s allegory is rooted in indigenous Palestinian Jewish discourse.<br \/>\nWe have surveyed a number of issues not directly related to Pesher Nahum or even the Dead Sea Scrolls, with the intent of providing a particularly fascinating example of the process by which the religious thought of this sectarian Jewish group was gradually transformed in a novel Christian framework into a doctrine that is hostile to the Torah and to Judaism. It is the separatist zeal of the Essenes, their willingness to break with the path of mainstream Judaism that led to their self-perception as the true Israel, or as the kernel of a future, eschatological Israel. Their separatism was presented in terms of the separation of Judah from the wicked northern kingdom of Israel, which led, in turn, to the identification of their enemies with Ephraim (the Pharisees) and Manasseh (the Sadducees) and themselves with Jerusalem, and especially eschatological Jerusalem. The separatism of this typology is quite pronounced, and it is no coincidence that the same city that is the site of the criminal Wicked Priest and of those seeking after smooth interpretations, becomes the typological symbol of the community. In Galatians 4:25, Paul explicitly states that the symbolic Jerusalem is not identical with \u201cthe present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.\u201d<br \/>\nFor the rabbinic sages, to the contrary, the holy city of Jerusalem could not be merely a pale allegory, devoid of the great emotional resonance that the eternal city evoked throughout Jewish history. The same is true of the tribal typology according to which the Qumran community identified itself with Judah and the other Jewish groups with Manasseh and Ephraim. The tribal typology, then, is fundamentally separatist. The Pharisees, who by all accounts\u2014mainstream and sectarian alike\u2014were seen as leaders by most of the Jewish populace, developed an opposing ideology. \u201cAll Israel have a share of the world to come,\u201d teaches the Mishnah (m. Sanhedrin 10.1). Naturally, there were those among the Pharisees who sought to weaken the force of this rallying cry, and believed that some groups, be they wicked or in error, have no part in the world to come. Nonetheless, the core statement that all Israel will be redeemed remained a great Jewish principle even down to the present day. The Essene ideology was altogether different. In some passages they are willing to admit that a sizable portion of the people are not evil but rather have been misled by the Pharisees. Even so, their central ideological line shows no mercy to the Jewish people as a whole. As noted, this separatist tendency found expression in the tribal typology. But as far as the rabbis are concerned, it is well known that they identified Rome with Edom, but it is hard to believe that they would identify their enemies with the children of Jacob, the Jewish patriarch.<br \/>\nThe rabbinic sages knew of the new, eschatological covenant that God would establish with Israel from Jeremiah 31:31: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018And I will maintain my covenant with you\u2019 (Lev. 26:9), not as the first covenant, which you broke, as it is written: \u2018a covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, says the Lord. But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord\u2019 (Jer. 31:32\u201333)\u201d (Sifra to Leviticus 26:9). This midrash\u2014quite unusual in rabbinic literature\u2014notwithstanding, the Pharisees did not believe that the first Sinaitic covenant was transgressed by most of the nation. The members of the Qumran community, on the other hand, believed themselves to be the only group faithful to the spirit and the letter of the covenant with God. They were, moreover, convinced that their own congregation, with its unique lifestyle and religious observance, is the new covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied. Thus their view that \u201cfutile are all those who do not know the covenant, and all those who scorn his word he shall cause to vanish from the world\u201d (1QS 5.19).<br \/>\nThe early church similarly adhered to a dual-covenant ideology: the first at Sinai and the second with the advent and death of Jesus. Christianity could not annul the first covenant without becoming Gnostics, but with the parting of the ways the tension toward the first covenant\u2014the Mosaic Torah and its commandments\u2014grew progressively stronger. Jesus himself is the guarantee of a better covenant (Heb. 7:22), that is, a more perfect covenant since it \u201chas been enacted through better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no need to look for a second one\u201d (Heb. 8:6\u20137). According to the author of Hebrews, then, Jeremiah taught that the first covenant was obsolete, and the obsolete and the old is destined to disappear (Heb. 8:13). Still, the Epistle to the Hebrews does not present an absolute break between the obsolete old covenant and the new Christian one, as the former stands in relation to the latter as the flesh to the spirit. This, moreover, is the relation that holds in Hebrews 12:18\u201324, in which the two covenants are likened to Sinai and heavenly Jerusalem, respectively. The author of Hebrews does not present this as a dichotomy but rather two levels, with the later, Christian covenant inhabiting an immeasurably higher position than the terrible and awesome covenant at Sinai.<br \/>\nAs the above discussion demonstrates, both the dual-covenant theology and the Epistle to the Hebrews\u2019 use of Zion as a symbol for the community have counterparts in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The entire passage, then, represents an interesting Christian development of motifs from the Essene writings. The novelty of this approach lies in the greater tension toward the first, Sinaitic covenant, which Hebrews represents as a concrete mountain (12:18), whereas the symbol of the new community is heavenly Jerusalem. In the parallel passage in Galatians (4:21\u201331), Paul takes this view so far as to develop a symbolic vocabulary that is inherently offensive to Judaism itself: the symbol of the Jewish people and their faith is Ishmael and Hagar, his mother, while Mt. Sinai is referred to as a \u2018mountain in Arabia.\u2019 The symbol for the nascent Christian community, however, is Isaac and Sarah, his mother, along with the heavenly Jerusalem: Judaism bears children into slavery, Christianity into freedom.<br \/>\nPaul\u2019s complex relation to the Jewish people and the Torah lies beyond the purview of the present discussion. It should be noted, however, that it is by no means as negative as the above passage from Galatians might suggest. In invoking it I have only sought to indicate the potential dangers of the separatist typology of the Essenes, as we know it from Pesher Nahum and the other Qumran Scrolls.<br \/>\nIn summary: the Dead Sea Scrolls shed new light on Josephus\u2019s statement regarding the three Jewish \u201cschools\u201d: the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. Though some scholars thought Josephus\u2019s division was artificial, we saw that the Qumran community divides the Jewish populace into the same three religious groups. The accord between Josephus and the Scrolls in this regard serves as further proof that the Dead Sea community is Essene. To be sure, Josephus describes the groups as philosophical schools, while the Essene scribes employ a tribal typology: they are none other than the faithful house of Judah, while their enemies are the two main tribes of Israel who betrayed the Lord\u2014the Pharisees Ephraim, the Sadducees Manasseh. The elucidation of these appellations paves the way, moreover, to an important insight regarding a key element in the Dead Sea community\u2019s history, namely, that the wicked priest may be Aristobulus, the son of Alexander Jannaeus and brother of John Hyrcanus. Furthermore, the Teacher of Righteousness, who founded the community, was still alive during the reign of Alexandra Salome, but survived the persecution of the Sadducees and Pharisees.<br \/>\nAlongside the tribal, the Qumran texts employ a second typology that involves cities. Jerusalem, or Zion, which historically served as the capital of Judah, symbolized the Essene community, while other cities designated their opponents. Thus Pesher Micah identifies Samaria with the Pharisees, while in Pesher Nahum Nineveh symbolizes the Pharisees and Thebes the Sadducees. All these typologies can ultimately be traced back to the separatist ideology of the Qumran community. Only a group that takes pride in having broken with the way of mainstream Judaism could associate their rival contemporaries with the names of the northern tribes. Similarly, the group\u2019s self-identification with Jerusalem\u2014though superficially an expression of radical fidelity to the sacred values of Jewish teachings\u2014is in fact the result of the annulment of the positive link between earthly Jerusalem and the Jewish people as a whole. One possible result of this approach is evident in the New Testament appropriation of these typologies, which arguably hastened the break between nascent Christianity and Judaism, as the church became predominantly gentile.<\/p>\n<p>Appendix<\/p>\n<p>While this article was in press, Allegro published the texts from Cave 4, some of which had already been published elsewhere. These new fragments generally buttress our conclusions. With regard to Jerusalem, it appears that despite their separatist ideology, the Qumran community could not break with their love of the holy city, as two texts that deal with the fall of Jerusalem attest. The first is 4QTanhumin (= 4Q176), the so called Consolations Scroll, whose author cries out to God: \u201cSee the corpses of your priests \u2026 there is no one to bury them\u201d (4Q176 1.3\u20134; based on Psalm 79:2\u20133). It stands to reason that this is a sectarian text, while the other, 4QApocryphal Lamentations (= 4Q179), contains no sectarian characteristics but only lamentations over Jerusalem very much in keeping with the biblical Book of Lamentations. The question, then, is whether these two texts reflect Pompey\u2019s conquest of Jerusalem.<br \/>\nThe following is a list of the occurrences of the various topics discussed in the present article: Sadducees: 4Q174 1.17\u201319; The Evil Priest: 4Q174 4.4; Pharisees: 4Q162 2.6\u20137, 10; 4Q163 Frag. 23, 2.10\u201311; 4Q166 2.4\u20136; 4Q171 1.25\u201327; 2.13\u201315, 17\u201319; 4Q177 2.12; The Man of Deceit: 4Q171 1.25\u201327; 4.14; The Teacher of Righteousness: 4Q171 1.25\u201327; 2.17\u201319; 3.15\u201317, 19; 4.27; 4Q173 Frag. 1.4.<br \/>\nAllegro\u2019s texts also include an important addition to Pesher Nahum, which contains a prophecy regarding God\u2019s destruction of the Romans. After citing Nahum 1:3\u20134 (up to \u201che rebukes the sea and makes it dry\u201d), the author states: \u201cIts interpretation: the sea are all the Kittim \u2026 to carry out judgment against them and to eliminate them from the face of the earth \u2026 with all their chiefs whose rule he will end\u201d (4Q169 fragments 1\u20132).<br \/>\nWe stated that the Scrolls use \u201chouse of Judah\u201d to designate the Qumran community. A newly-published passage from Pesher Tehillim, however, suggests otherwise: \u201cIts interpretation alludes to the ruthless ones of the covenant who are in the House of Judah, who plot to destroy those who observe the law, who are in the Community Council. But God will not surrender them into their hands\u201d (4Q171 2.14\u201316). The phrase \u201cruthless ones of the covenant\u201d recurs at 3.12 (and see also Pesher Habakkuk 2.6). If the reference here is to a group that was never part of the Qumran community, then the passage must be a scribal error, since there is no question that \u201chouse of Judah\u201d and \u201cthose who observe the law\u201d belong together, as both refer to the Essenes. Thus the Scrolls speak of \u201call observing the Law in the House of Judah\u201d (1QpHab 8.1\u20132), while those who side with the community are \u201cthe simple folk of Judah, those who observe the Law\u201d (Pesher Habakkuk 12.3\u20135).<br \/>\nThe Psalms Pesher published by Allegro also contains an important passage concerning the Man of Lies, the leader of the Pharisees: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018Be still before the LORD, and wait patiently for him; do not fret over those who prosper in their way, over those who carry out evil devices\u2019 (Ps. 37:7): Its interpretation concerns the Man of Lies who misdirected many with deceptive words, for they have chosen worthless things and did not listen to the Interpreter of Knowledge. This is why they will die by the sword, by hunger, and by plague\u201d (4QpPsa 1.25\u20132.1). Note that the Pharisee leader is associated not only with the biblical phrase \u201cwho carry out evil devices\u201d but also \u201cwho prosper in their way,\u201d since indeed the majority of the nation supported the Pharisees. He \u201cmisdirected many with deceptive words,\u201d a phrase reminiscent of the \u201cfraudulent teaching\u201d of the \u201cmisleaders from Ephraim\u201d by which they \u201cmisdirect many,\u201d as discussed in Pesher Nahum (2.8\u201310). It is interesting that the new passage of Pesher Psalms accuses the Pharisees of having \u201cchosen worthless things.\u201d The Hebrew \u05e7\u05dc\u05d5\u05ea, \u2018worthless things,\u2019 may also be translated as \u2018lenient matters\u2019 and opposed with the stricter \u05d7\u05de\u05d5\u05e8\u05d5\u05ea, a division familiar from the rabbinic corpus. The halakhically stricter Essenes may have seen the Pharisees (with a good degree of justification) as having \u201cchosen lenient matters.\u201d Against the Man of Lies, \u201cwho misdirected many with his deceptive words,\u201d we find the Interpreter of Knowledge, whose words were not heeded. This is the Teacher of Righteousness, a figure whose centrality is recognized by all students of the Scrolls. The new texts confirm a particular detail concerning his life. The sectarian Pesher Psalms says of the verse \u201cmy tongue is like the pen of a ready scribe\u201d (Ps. 45:2), \u201cIts interpretation concerns the Teacher of Righteousness \u2026 [granted by] God with the reply of the tongue\u201d (4QpPsa 4.27), an apparent reference to the literary work of the Teacher of Righteousness.<\/p>\n<p>17.      The Apocryphal Psalms of David<\/p>\n<p>Written with Shmuel Safrai<\/p>\n<p>The Psalms of Israel\u2019s King, David<br \/>\nDedicated to Tzvi ben Yohanan Flusser,<br \/>\nBy his grandfather, David Flusser<\/p>\n<p>Some time ago we published in memory of our friend, Meir Grintz, two double-sided pages from the Cairo Genizah containing apocryphal \u201cPsalms of David.\u201d As we will see, these are probably the remnants of a large apocryphal work composed during the Second Temple period, and that made its way from Qumran to the Genizah in the same way as did the Damascus Document and the Aramaic Testament of Levi, fragments of which were found at Qumran.<br \/>\nThe nature of the texts was pointed out to us by the workers of the manuscript department at the Jewish National and University Library when they received a facsimile of the manuscript. E. E. Urbach, of the Talmud Department at the Hebrew University, discovered that the text had already been published by A. Harkavy in the ha-Goren 3 (1902), 82\u201385. Harkavy describes the manuscript as \u201ctwo attached parchment pages, containing the prayers and praises of a man who apparently thought of himself as a prophetic and messianic figure.\u201d They are housed in the Antonine collection of the Genizah, in Leningrad. We used both the facsimile copy and Harkavy\u2019s published text, with some minor corrections:<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>Revealed before you are the righteous and the evil;<br \/>\nyou want not for human witnesses:<br \/>\nJudge of generations, your rulings are just,<br \/>\nKnowing in the ways of all living things:<br \/>\nYou desire justice and despise injustice;<br \/>\nThe boastful will not stand before your glory:<br \/>\nYou divided the world into darkness and light,<br \/>\ninto pure and impure, justice and lie:<br \/>\n5      You cast off from your nation all aliens,<br \/>\npurifying your flock of impure beasts:<br \/>\nYou bestow upon your servant your mighty wisdom;<br \/>\nhe understands all according to your desire:<br \/>\nYou have planted righteousness in the land of truth,<br \/>\nmultiplying justice throughout eternity:<br \/>\nAll who worship your name are learned of song,<br \/>\nall those who believe the words of your servant:<br \/>\nTheir righteousness is increased in the sight of all the land<br \/>\nand of those who do justice, whom they love in their hearts:<br \/>\n10      You have set their path toward your commandments,<br \/>\nextending their might through your wondrous deeds:<br \/>\nFor all eternity they worship your name,<br \/>\nglorifying it forevermore:<br \/>\nWho is like you in deeds, who in exploits,<br \/>\nwho is like you in your many great feats:<br \/>\nYou have forgiven and absolved us our sins,<br \/>\nlovingly exonerated all our transgressions:<br \/>\nYour spirit prophesies through your servant;<br \/>\nfor you draw the end near, it will tarry no more:<br \/>\n15      You vowed of old to your servant David,<br \/>\nmercifully anointing the shoot of Jesse:<br \/>\nYou sustained his authority in your sanctity<br \/>\nfor he spread your praise to the ends of the earth:<br \/>\nYou set his name as an eternal pillar;<br \/>\nhe repairs the breach and rebuilds the ruins:<br \/>\nA cornerstone despised by the builders<br \/>\nyou have raised to the headstone above all nations:<br \/>\nJoyfully you crown him with glory,<br \/>\ncalling him the splendor of all nations:<br \/>\n20      You multiplied justice and righteousness in his day,<br \/>\npeace and blessings forever beyond counting:<br \/>\nAll the elect of justice rejoice before you<br \/>\nfor they glory in the beloved land:<br \/>\nYou have sanctified through him the holy name,<br \/>\nand he recounts daily the songs of your might:<br \/>\nYou made him greater than all the angels,<br \/>\nestablishing him as king of all nations forever:<br \/>\nYou broke before him all the kings of Midian,<br \/>\ndrowning in the abyss all those who hate him:<br \/>\n25      You sustain his right arm, bearing the sword,<br \/>\ngiving strength to his arm over all the warriors of Kedar:<br \/>\nHis leg will not stumble for he trusts in your name;<br \/>\nhis power will not wane for you lovingly aid him:<br \/>\nBlessed is the man whose faith is in your teaching<br \/>\nfor he shall not be shamed forevermore:<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>My soul trusts in you, answer me in your grace;<br \/>\nblessed are you, O Lord God, who answers his servant at the time<br \/>\nthat he calls unto him:<br \/>\nMerciful God, have mercy upon us;<br \/>\nblessed is the name of the glory of his kingdom forever:<br \/>\nBlessed is the name of his glory forever;<br \/>\nblessed are you, O Lord God of Israel, for all eternity;<br \/>\nAnd the entire people said Amen: On the second day of Iyar I beheld a<br \/>\nvision and all his prophecies, and I prayed before the Lord, saying:<br \/>\n5      May your mercy, O Lord our God, rest upon the flock doomed to<br \/>\nslaughter;<br \/>\nthe shepherds have killed it without mercy:<br \/>\nMercifully bind the crushed bones;<br \/>\nheal lovingly the wounds of your lot:<br \/>\nFor you have placed me before you for the sake of the world;<br \/>\nyou have placed me in your might as a light to the nations:<br \/>\n10      Let the rulers gather, all the kings of the earth,<br \/>\nthe lords of the world and the rulers of man:<br \/>\nThat they may see the might of your right hand<br \/>\nand understand the mystery of your holy teachings:<br \/>\nLet the righteous man be gladdened when he sees this,<br \/>\nrejoicing before you with hymns and gratitude:<br \/>\nLet all the inhabitants of the earth learn from me,<br \/>\nrepenting their ways to worship you in faith:<br \/>\n15      They will greet your presence with thanksgiving,<br \/>\nwith hymns and songs and giving thanks:<br \/>\nMagnifying your glory within their encampment<br \/>\nlet them know that you, O Lord, created them:<br \/>\nAll who worship idols shall be shamed<br \/>\nfor they will come to recognize their statues:<br \/>\nNo longer will they worship idols<br \/>\nnor bow down to artifacts:<br \/>\nThe idols will utterly pass away,<br \/>\ntheir delights lost forever:<br \/>\n20      All your creatures will glorify and sanctify you<br \/>\nfrom now and for all eternity:<br \/>\nYour servant will speak of your wondrous deeds<br \/>\naccording to his strength and the spirit of his words:<br \/>\nFor I take joy in nothing<br \/>\nsave your teachings and the appearance of your glory:<br \/>\nFor the sake of your great mercies, do not hide yourself from me;<br \/>\ndo not cause me to die for their love:<br \/>\nFor I have loved your residence<br \/>\nmore than all the palaces of kings:<br \/>\n25      The teachings of your mouth are better for me<br \/>\nthan a myriad of gold bullion:<br \/>\nYour sacred words are better for me<br \/>\nthan any fine garment:<br \/>\nThe commandments of your will are better for me<br \/>\nthan the precious stones and pearls, the desire of kings:<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>Blessed is he who finds glory in the wishes of your will;<br \/>\nfor your sake I shall indeed request of you:<br \/>\nThis is my desire and my only wish<br \/>\nthat I reside in your presence forever:<br \/>\nTo walk in your righteousness without sin and pursue<br \/>\nyour truth every day, as is right in your eyes:<br \/>\nDo not deny me this request;<br \/>\nfulfill my request as though it were the wish of your will:<br \/>\n5      I will set myself in them for all eternity,<br \/>\nknowing the paths of your righteousness:<br \/>\nBlessed be God who does this,<br \/>\nblessed the one who performs these feats:<br \/>\nBlessed be he who selected his servant<br \/>\nand who fulfills all the wishes of my heart:<br \/>\nBlessed be the name of the glory of his kingdom forever and ever,<br \/>\nblessed be the name of his glory forever:<br \/>\nBlessed is the Lord God of Israel for all eternity,<br \/>\nand the people respond: Amen:<br \/>\n10      On the third day of Iyar I beheld a vision and all his prophecies, and<br \/>\nI prayed before the Lord, saying:<br \/>\nBlessed be he who impoverishes and enriches,<br \/>\nblessed be he who lays low and raises on high:<br \/>\nFor he had raised the lowly from the dust,<br \/>\nthe poor man from the refuse heap:<br \/>\nHe made his throne greater than all ministers,<br \/>\nhis power mightier than all rulers:<br \/>\n15      He gave all that kings desire,<br \/>\nthe might of nations and treasures of kings:<br \/>\nKings\u2019 daughters for his glory,<br \/>\ndaughters of Jerusalem for the glory of his kingdom:<br \/>\nHis blessed ones speak for all eternity;<br \/>\nall the mighty of the earth will bow before him:<br \/>\nThey will put their trust in the Lord for he has done mighty deeds,<br \/>\nno longer going astray after vanity and error:<br \/>\nFor all will know the Lord<br \/>\nfrom the mightiest man to the most humble:<br \/>\n20      For the Lord is judge over the entire world;<br \/>\nhe sets one on high while laying the other low:<br \/>\nHe gives to whom he will,<br \/>\nproviding an inheritance for the poorest of men:<br \/>\nFor the soul of every man is in his power,<br \/>\nand the spirit of all flesh will bow down to him:<br \/>\nSing to him, raise your voices in song,<br \/>\nspeak all his great deeds:<br \/>\nSing to his name at all times<br \/>\nfor splendor and might are befitting him:<br \/>\n25      He saved the soul of his beloved from the straits<br \/>\nand the spirit of his righteous ones from all harm:<br \/>\nFor he trusts in his name and in the glory of the vision<br \/>\nand in his holy words, in all the paths of life:<br \/>\nForever will we worship his name,<br \/>\nspeaking his might for all eternity.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>For he heals the brokenhearted,<br \/>\nbandages the bones of the downtrodden:<br \/>\nHe turns sorrow to joy,<br \/>\nfear and trembling to refuge:<br \/>\nFor his is the earth and all that is in it,<br \/>\nthe universe and all its inhabitants:<br \/>\nHe has commanded his servant before him,<br \/>\nthe splendor and brilliance and glory of his kingship:<br \/>\n5      He wills the good of his people,<br \/>\nsending the healer to heal their flesh:<br \/>\nHe made weighty his teaching upon his servant,<br \/>\nhis commands by the agency of his trusted messenger:<br \/>\nHe magnified wisdom and understanding in his heart,<br \/>\ngreat sanctity without measure:<br \/>\nWho is like him, who compares to him<br \/>\nwho has not forgotten the cry of the poor?<br \/>\nHe recalled in his abundant mercies the poor and the downtrodden;<br \/>\nI too recalled the mighty deed and power of his kingship,<br \/>\nthe splendor of his power:<br \/>\n10      Night and day I stand before him,<br \/>\nblessing his memory for all his creatures:<br \/>\nMay you be blessed and glorified, master of the generations,<br \/>\nsanctified and glorified, the governor of all creatures:<br \/>\nMay the mouths of all your servants speak your unity,<br \/>\nrighteous and true judge:<br \/>\nBlessed are you Lord<br \/>\nGod, who kindly recalls his servant\u2019s covenant forever:<br \/>\nBlessed is the name of the glory of his kingship forevermore,<br \/>\nblessed is the name of his glory forever:<br \/>\n15      Blessed is the Lord God of Israel for all eternity, and the people say:<br \/>\nAmen.<br \/>\nOn the fourth day of Iyar I beheld a vision and all his prophecies, and I<br \/>\nprayed before the Lord, saying:<br \/>\nBlessed is he for he has broken the wicked<br \/>\nand raised up the horn of the righteous:<br \/>\nHis knowledge and wisdom are in my heart,<br \/>\nfor you are the righteous judge:<br \/>\n20      No false judgment will you proclaim<br \/>\nbut only truth and faithfulness:<br \/>\nYou give to all according to their ways,<br \/>\naccording to the fruit of their doings:<br \/>\nThere is no deceit in your actions,<br \/>\nno falsity in your words:<br \/>\nYour action is wholly pure,<br \/>\nno injustice in your deeds:<br \/>\nYou have multiplied your judgment like a flowing river,<br \/>\ngrowing your righteousness like a blessed seed:<br \/>\n25      Blessed is he who receives your holiness;<br \/>\nhe will speak of your glory every day:<br \/>\nMy support lies in the presence of your glory<br \/>\nfor eternity to stand in your will:<br \/>\nFor yesterday and today<br \/>\nblessed are they that keep your commandments:<\/p>\n<p>This is the end of the fourth page; no more is extant. Who is the true author of these psalms, and who is the assumed author? Or, in Harkavy\u2019s words, who is this prophet and messiah? The poet speaks as though he lives in the time of the temple, and is intimately tied to the temple, saying \u201cFor I have loved your residence more than all the palaces of kings.\u201d The author also appears to be a prophet, for \u201cI take joy in nothing save your teachings and the appearance of your glory.\u201d He writes his psalms after seeing \u201ca vision and all his prophecies,\u201d and then he prays and recites the next poem. Prior to the final extant psalm he provides a more precise definition: \u201cOn the fourth day of Iyar I beheld a vision and all his prophecies, and I prayed before the Lord, saying.\u201d According to this statement, then, his psalms are the result of a vision he experiences through the divine spirit. But the poet does not just cast himself as a poet from the time of the temple; he is nothing less than the king of Israel. God has elevated \u201chis throne greater than all ministers; his power mightier than all rulers. He gave all that kings desire; the might of nations and treasures of kings. Kings\u2019 daughters for his glory; daughters of Jerusalem for the glory of his kingdom.\u201d Our author, then, likens himself to the king and ancient prophet of Israel, living alongside the temple. Moreover, he writes all this in the style of the psalms, which leads us to the conclusion that this is the remnant of pseudepigraphal psalms attributed to David himself. Confirmation that this view comes from the author\u2019s desire to be associated with a biblical character is evident in his decision to write out the tetragrammaton, a decision dutifully followed by the copyist of the Genizah manuscript, who apparently recognized the special nature of this text. Needless to say, the copyist shared the common view that the biblical psalms were written\u2014largely or exclusively\u2014by David, so there is no difficulty with the fact that the author, who uses the name David, speaks of the temple as if it existed during his reign, while speaking of \u2018David\u2019 in the third person: \u201cYou vowed of old to your servant David.\u201d Both phenomena, after all, are attested in the biblical psalms. In trying to piece together the image of David in the apocryphal psalms, we can, then, make use both of what the psalmist says of himself and of what is reported of David in the third person. As we will see, these elements form a complete and fascinating portrait.<br \/>\nBut before we turn to this question, we must first examine when this collection was composed. As noted, the Cairo Genizah contains copies of Qumran compositions. And, indeed, we have reports of medieval discoveries of ancient Hebrew manuscripts, the most important of which for the present discussion is found in a Syriac epistle by the Nestorian Bishop Timotheos. Timotheos recounts that he has heard from reliable Jews who were about to convert to Christianity, that ten years earlier a trove of biblical and other scrolls, all written in Hebrew, had been discovered outside Jericho and had found their way to the Jewish community in Jerusalem. One of his Jewish sources even told Timotheos: \u201cAmong these scrolls we found more than two hundred psalms of David.\u201d Needless to say, there is no way to assess the nature of this discovery. We can only hypothesize that these Hebrew scrolls discovered near Jericho originated in Qumran and that they found their way from the Jewish community of Jerusalem to Cairo, thus explaining their presence in the famous Genizah. It is particularly noteworthy that one of the Jews referred to more than two hundred psalms from the cave, though we cannot know that these are in any way related to the text whose remnants are here under discussion. Be that as it may, there are Qumran psalms attributed to King David: the Psalms Scroll published by Sanders includes apocryphal psalms alongside the biblical, so it is clear that the Essenes preserved the latter as well. As far as we could ascertain, however, the Qumran texts do not contain so much as a single fragment of our text. If these apocryphal psalms did in fact originate in the Qumran library, it may be that they simply did not survive though it is also possible that they were removed in their entirety and thus found their way into the hands of medieval Jews. If so, they simply were no longer there when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered.<br \/>\nInterestingly, the Qumran Psalms Scroll contains an inventory of David\u2019s compositions, including the prima facie fantastic number of four thousand five hundred psalms. Yet we see here that even far-flung statements should not be rejected out of hand. For while it is difficult to imagine that there existed a workgroup able to compose such a great corpus and attribute it to King David, it would appear that at least some portion of this work was in fact completed. For the Psalms Scroll states that David composed \u201cfour thousand and fifty\u201d songs (11Q5 27.10)! And indeed we find in the two Genizah pages psalms of David composed for the first, second, third and fourth of Iyar. Thus, the Qumran text complements the results of the internal analysis of the Genizah texts, a strong argument in favor of an early dating of our Genizah Psalms. Only clear internal evidence belying the possibility that these psalms were composed while the temple still stood could indicate that the complementary relationship between this text and the Qumran psalms is mere coincidence. If, however, the Psalms Scroll does indicate that there were psalms attributed to David during its composition, then the Genizah Psalms were written before the Qumran text, that is, following Sanders, before the first half of the first century C.E. Moreover, if these are the psalms referred to in the Dead Sea Scrolls, then they were produced in the same milieu as the Qumran community, in other words, they are also Essene. The Essene origins of the Qumran psalm inventory are evident in the number of daily psalms mentioned, 364, corresponding to the number of days in the calendar shared by the Scrolls, the Book of Jubilees, and 1 Enoch\u2014the latter two works composed within the broader group that gave rise to the Qumran community. As noted, the Genizah contains only two pages of the composition. However, even if we had a way of ascertaining that the entire corpus was completed, that is, that 364 daily psalms were composed, there would be no way to determine that the entire composition came into the possession of medieval Jewish communities, i.e., that these are two extant pages of a once complete work. Be all that as it may, these speculations have no effect on the discussion at hand.<br \/>\nIt is noteworthy that apparently the Psalms Scroll from Qumran not only mentions our composition, but that it discusses the divine inspiration that rested upon David in his writing. The passage opens with the statement: \u201cAnd David, son of Jesse, was wise, and a light like the light of the sun\u201d (11Q5 27.2), while the Genizah psalms read \u201cyou have placed me in your might as a light to the nations\u201d (2.8; based on Isaiah 42:6; 49:6). The Qumran psalms then state that \u201cYHWH gave him a discerning and enlightened spirit\u201d (11Q5 27.4), and conclude with the words, \u201cAll these [David] spoke through the spirit of prophecy which had been given to him from before the Most High\u201d (11Q5 27.11). The same position is attested in the Genizah psalms, at the opening of each and every psalm: prior to composing the psalm, David is allowed to see \u201ca vision and all his prophecies.\u201d Indeed, the poet states that he \u201ctake [s] joy in nothing save your teachings and the appearance of your glory\u201d (2.22). The phrase \u201cappearance of your glory\u201d is taken from Exodus 24:17, where it refers to the Sinai epiphany, and appears in the same framework in a Qumran discussion of the Ten Commandments: \u201cAnd you have renewed your covenant with them in the vision of glory, and in the words of your holy spirit, by the works of your hand\u201d (1Q34 Frag. 3, 2.6\u20137). The parallel between the Qumran corpus and the Genizah psalms is significant, as their author attributes to himself the gift of prophecy: \u201cYour spirit prophesies through your servant for you draw the end near, it will tarry no more\u201d (1.14). This last phrase recalls Ben Sira\u2019s eschatological prayer (36:10): \u201cHasten the day and remember the appointed time.\u201d Both these later verses are ultimately dependent upon Isaiah 60:22: \u201cI am the Lord; in its time I will accomplish it quickly.\u201d Clearly, then, the author of the Psalms of David presents himself as a prophet prophesying regarding the end of days.<br \/>\nWe just mentioned the transition passages between the psalms. They are quite similar, with minor differences at their end. The connection between the previous psalm and the transition is regularly created by the word \u2018blessed\u2019 (barukh), which opens the final doublet of the psalm and then is repeated in the transition doxology. The first is: \u201cBlessed is the name of the glory of his kingdom forever,\u201d a phrase that has its origins in the Temple. The second doxological statement is quite similar: \u201cblessed is the name of his glory forever,\u201d which recalls the end of the second book of the Psalter (Ps. 72:19): \u201cBlessed be his glorious name forever; may his glory fill the whole earth.\u201d The third transition statement is \u201cBlessed are you, O Lord God of Israel, for all eternity, and the entire people said Amen.\u201d This very statement concludes the fourth book of the Psalter (Ps. 106:48, and see the similar verse at the end of the first book, Ps. 41:14). The three doxological statements are, then, an imitation of the concluding verses of the biblical Psalter, but also the first statement once uttered in the temple. After the three statements, the author introduces the date of the next psalm and reaffirms that he is writing it on the basis of a vision and prophetic inspiration.<br \/>\nWe are working on the assumption that these apocryphal psalms were attributed to David, the king, prophet, and poet, and that they were composed during the Second Temple period and were part of the same movement from which the Qumran community emerged. In what follows we will provide evidence that we believe points to the historical setting in which these Psalms of David were composed. There are, however, a number of potential counterarguments to be addressed, e.g., that the fragments speak of the month of Iyar, since the Babylonian months are attested in rabbinic literature but not in the apocalyptic and visionary texts of the apocrypha (to say nothing of the biblical David). However, the Babylonian month names made their way to Israel following Cyrus\u2019s decree and are attested in the biblical books composed after the return to Zion. If so, there is no reason to think that the names of the months were interpolated by medieval copyists: they were familiar to the author, who did not see them as anachronistic since they appear in the Hebrew Bible. A more serious problem is the form \u05d8\u05e2\u05ea\u05d4, rather than \u05e0\u05d8\u05e2\u05ea\u05d7 at 1.7\u2014undoubtedly chosen because the acrostic required a line beginning with tet. It is true that this form is only known from much later Hebrew poetry, but why would we assume that it could not be used in an earlier acrostic text? Especially since there are so few reliable witnesses to the Hebrew poetry of the period. It is worth noting the hymn in 2 Samuel 22:41, \u201cYou made (\u05ea\u05ea\u05d4) my enemies turn their backs to me,\u201d which contains a similar form in the middle of the verse, i.e., not motivated by the formal requirement of the acrostic. The same hymn repeats in Psalm 18, but there (v. 41) the form \u05ea\u05ea\u05d4 is replaced with the more regular \u05e0\u05ea\u05ea\u05d4.<br \/>\nAnother interesting linguistic phenomenon involves the verse \u201cYou have sanctified through him the holy name and he recounts daily the songs of your might\u201d (1.22). The phrase \u201csongs of your might\u201d is based on Psalm 59:17, where David declares \u201cI will sing of your might.\u201d The nominal phrase is attested in the qedusha prayers: \u201cOur eyes shall behold your kingdom as the word stated in the songs of your might by David your righteous messiah,\u201d which is followed by Psalm 146:10. At 4.12 God is called \u201crighteous and true judge,\u201d corresponding to the statement in Mishnah Berakhot 9.2: \u201cUpon hearing bad tidings, one says: blessed is the true judge.\u201d It appears the sages based their statement on a dictum that was current at the time, for the Qumran psalm similarly states: \u201cMay the judge of truth turn away from me the recompenses of evil\u201d (11Q5 24.6). Another statement is cited in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai: \u201cBlessed is the true judge, the master of all deeds, you who have neither injustice nor impartiality in your presence.\u201d The combination of addressing God as a true judge and referring to his creatures is repeated in the Genizah psalms: \u201cMay you be blessed and glorified, master of the generations; sanctified and glorified, the governor of all creatures\u201d (4.11). It appears to us that the entire passage is significant for the evolution of Jewish prayer and doxology and, inter alia, for the history of the Qaddish. A similar phrase \u201cAll your creatures will glorify and sanctify you\u201d appears at 2.20. Further, immediately following 4.11 we read \u201cMay the mouths of all your servants speak your unity,\u201d indicating that God\u2019s name is unified in the prayer of his servants.<br \/>\nAt 1.10 we find: \u201cYou have set their path toward your commandments extending their might (\u05d5\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8\u05ea\u05d4 \u05db\u05d5\u05d7\u05dd) through your wondrous deeds.\u201d Now we can examine the history of the rabbinic phrase \u201cmay your strength be extended\u201d (\u05d9\u05d9\u05e9\u05e8 \u05db\u05d7\u05da). Speaking of David, our text says to God, \u201cYou placed his name as an eternal pillar.\u201d Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai is famously referred to as \u201cthe right pillar\u201d (b. Berakhot 28b, based on 1 Kings 7:21, and see also \u201cthe righteous is an eternal foundation\u201d in Proverbs 10:25); the three most important disciples of Jesus were called \u201cpillars\u201d; and the biblical patriarchs are \u201cthree great stakes in the world.\u201d Prior to the praise of the ancestors in Ben Sira the Hebrew manuscripts read \u201cPraise of the Fathers of the World,\u201d and Hillel and Shammai were referred to as \u201cthe fathers of the world.\u201d According to one rabbinic midrash, we are told that when God sought to create the world, he foresaw Abraham and said \u201cI have found a foundation on which to establish the world,\u201d while another states that God said to Moses \u201cyou are standing on the site of the pillar of the world,\u201d referring to Abraham in the same epithet our psalmist uses for David. Incidentally, here and elsewhere, the Hebrew \u02bfolam appears both in a spatial (\u2018world\u2019) and temporal sense (\u2018eternity\u2019), unlike the Dead Sea Scrolls, which employ only the latter. That said, it should be noted that ultimately, the Genizah psalms assert, the nations of the world \u201cwill put their trust in the Lord for he has done mighty deeds no longer going astray after vanity and error\u201d (3.18), using a word for \u2018error,\u2019 mishgeh, that occurs only once in the Bible (Genesis 43:12), but recurs in the Qumran Scrolls. There as here it serves as a technical term for a religious mistake. Thus we find in 1 QHa 10:20\u201321: \u201cYou placed in his heart to open the source of knowledge for all those who understand. But they have changed them for an uncircumcised lip and weird tongue of a people without understanding, and so they will be ruined by their mistake (mishgatam).\u201d While the Damascus Document states: \u201cJacob\u2019s sons strayed because of them and were punished in accordance with their mistakes (mishgotam)\u201d (3.4\u20135). Still another Qumran document speaks of \u201cthose who turn aside from the path of the wicked\u201d (4Q174 fragment 1.14). It is this strong, theological sense of mishgeh employed in the Genizah psalms.<br \/>\nLet us return to the manner in which the Genizah psalms portray King David. One of the psalms refers to him as \u201cA cornerstone despised by the builders you have raised to the headstone above all nations\u201d (1.18), a paraphrase of Psalm 118:22: \u201cThe stone that the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone.\u201d This verse was interpreted by Jesus as a reference to himself (Matt. 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17), and this connection is repeated elsewhere in the New Testament. The sages, in contrast, relate the verse to David: David is the stone that is despised by the builders, these being his brothers, when he is chosen to be king. Apparently the author of the Genizah psalms interpreted the verse in a similar manner: David was \u201cthe youngest\u201d (1 Sam. 16:11), but ultimately God elevated him to be \u201cthe headstone above all nations\u201d\u2014an apparent gloss on the biblical \u201cthe chief cornerstone.\u201d We find a similar motif in the Qumran psalms: \u201cHe sent his prophet to anoint me, Samuel to make me great. My brothers went out to meet him, handsome of figure and handsome of appearance. Though they were tall of stature, handsome by their hair, YHWH God did not choose them\u201d (11Q5 28.8\u201310). It appears, then, that this interpretation is free of any messianic overtones, unlike the psalm that follows, where we read: \u201cYou have made him greater than all the angels\u201d (1.23)\u2014that is, David is greater even than the angels! Similar statements are known from midrashic sources preserved in the Tanhuma collection. Isaiah 52:13 states: \u201cSee, my servant shall prosper; he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high.\u201d The Targum glosses \u2018my servant\u2019 as \u2018my servant the Messiah,\u2019 while the sages interpret the verse as indicating that the Messiah \u201cwill be exalted above Abraham, lifted up above Moses, and very high above the ministering angels.\u201d To be sure, this interpretation is preserved in a late midrashic collection, but its origins are ancient as it is based on one of the core assumptions of Paul\u2019s epistle to the Hebrews. Paul states there that Christ is greater than the angels (1:4), and his glory is greater than that of Moses (3:2\u20136); Christ is compared to Melchizedek since the latter is greater than Abraham (7:4\u201310). It would appear, then, that the midrashic tradition that elevates the Messiah above Abraham, Moses, and the angels antecedes the Epistle to the Hebrews. The antiquity of this midrash is further attested in the words of Rabbi Yose in the Sifre Numbers, where Moses is described as more humble than the patriarchs, based on the biblical statement \u201cNow the man Moses was very humble, more so than anyone else on the face of the earth\u201d (Num. 12:3). Indeed, Moses was more faithful than the ministering angels, as Scripture notes, \u201che is entrusted with all my house\u201d (Num. 12:7). In his interpretation, Rabbi Yose takes \u201call my house\u201d to include God\u2019s own place of residing. There is a clear connection between the midrashic argument for the superiority of the messiah and the midrashic argument for the superiority of Moses, and it seems the latter is the earlier of the two. In any case, the author of the Genizah psalms states: \u201cYou made him greater than all the angels,\u201d echoing a midrash attested in rabbinic literature and known to the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Did anyone refer to the historical David as greater than Abraham or Moses or the ministering angels, or had our text elevated him to the angelic status because he was understood as a messianic figure?<br \/>\nBefore turning to this question, however, let us examine the biblical text known to the author of the Genizah Psalms. For while we have shown that a similarly structured composition appears in the Psalms Scroll of Qumran, and while nothing in our text argues decisively against its antiquity, it is nonetheless the case that every Second Temple text is, upon its discovery, generally categorized as medieval. Scholars who did not recognize the importance of diachronic analysis of the Hebrew language sought to locate the Damascus Document, Hebrew Ben Sira, and the Qumran Scrolls themselves in this later period. This tendency may be exacerbated by the fact that our text was only found in the Genizah, even if it is the same Genizah that yielded the Damascus Document, Aramaic Testament of Levi, and Hebrew Ben Sira. But those who wish to do so will face a formidable challenge if it can be shown that the biblical text that was used by the author differed from the Masoretic text in a number of details. We have already noted that 2.19 states \u201cThe idols will utterly pass away (\u05d9\u05d7\u05dc\u05d5\u05e4\u05d5),\u201d citing Isaiah 2:18 in accordance with the Qumran Isaiah Scroll and the Septuagint, but unlike the Masoretic Text, which reads \u201cit will pass away (\u05d9\u05d7\u05dc\u05d5\u05e3).\u201d In 2.6 we read: \u201cMercifully bind the crushed bones, heal lovingly the wounds of your lot.\u201d This line is based in part on Psalm 51:10, \u201clet the bones you have crushed rejoice,\u201d except that our author reads \u201ccrushed bones\u201d (\u05e2\u05e6\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05d3\u05db\u05d5\u05ea) with the Septuagint, against the MT\u2019s \u201cbones you have crushed\u201d (\u05e2\u05e6\u05de\u05d5\u05ea \u05d3\u05db\u05d5\u05ea). Another source is Psalm 147:3: \u201cHe heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds (\u05dc\u05e2\u05e6\u05d1\u05d5\u05ea\u05dd)\u201d whereas our author apparently read \u201ctheir bones\u201d (\u05dc\u05e2\u05e6\u05de\u05d5\u05ea\u05dd). This is confirmed by 4.1, which similarly alludes to these verses from Psalms: \u201cFor he heals the brokenhearted, bandages the bones of the downtrodden.\u201d<br \/>\nAnd how are we to interpret the conceptual parallels between the Genizah Psalms and the Essene worldview of the Dead Sea Scrolls? Already in the first psalm (1.3\u20134) we read: \u201cYou desire justice and despise injustice; the boastful will not stand before your glory. You divided the world into darkness and light; into pure and impure, justice and lie.\u201d Who can read this statement without recalling the moral dualism of the Essenes and the Scrolls\u2019 distinction between light and darkness? 1 Enoch similarly states that God \u201ccreated the distinction between light and darkness and separated the spirits of the people, and strengthened the spirits of the righteous in the name of his righteousness\u201d (41.8). And if we read in the Genizah Psalm \u201cYou desire justice and despise injustice,\u201d we recall not only Isaiah 7:16 (\u201cdespise the evil and choose the good\u201d) but also parallel formulations in the Qumran Scrolls, e.g., \u201cso that you can choose what he is pleased with and repudiate what he hates\u201d (CD 2.15). Note also the subsequent image, according to which \u201cYou cast off from your nation all aliens; purifying your flock of impure beasts\u201d (1.5). The nation or the community is referred to as a flock, while the foreigners are impure beasts. A similar image is proposed in the second psalm (2.5): \u201cMay your mercy, O Lord our God, be upon your flock doomed to slaughter; the shepherds have killed it without mercy.\u201d The phrase \u201cflock doomed to slaughter\u201d is found in Zechariah 11:4 and 11:7, and the prophet goes on to speak of the shepherds, but a closer parallel is found in 1 Enoch\u2019s vision of the seventy shepherds (89.19, 90.25), which likens the nations to shepherds who have received the flock, Israel, and are instructed to herd it and kill of it a fixed amount. But the shepherds do not abide by the killing quotas and kill more than is permitted, and as a result the owner of the flock\u2014God\u2014will eventually destroy these shepherds, who represent the angels assigned to govern the seventy gentile nations. This is the context of the statement concerning the \u201cflock doomed to slaughter; the shepherds have killed it without mercy.\u201d We also find in the Genizah Psalms one of the distinguishing phrases from Qumran. \u201cAll the elect of justice rejoice before you\u201d (1.21) employs the same appellation for God\u2019s chosen ones as the Qumran Scrolls (Hodayot 10.13; CD 2.3; 4Q184 1.14), 1 Enoch (following the Greek \u201cthe elect ones of justice\u201d), and Targum to Isaiah 12:3, where it appears in an eschatological sense. Interestingly, in its Aramaic form (\u05d1\u05d7\u05d9\u05e8\u05d9 \u05e6\u05d3\u05e7\u05d0) the phrase appears in Mandaic literature in reference to those who belong to the dominion of the good, and may refer to the Mandeans themselves. Another fascinating linguistic parallel between the Genizah Psalms and the Scrolls is \u201cthe wishes of his will\u201d which appears three times in our text (1.6; 3.1, 4), and once in the Damascus Document (3.15), where God is said to have revealed \u201chis just stipulations and his truthful paths, and the wishes of his will which man must do in order to live by them.\u201d In the Epistle to the Ephesians, which is deeply influenced by Essene thought, we find that God \u201cchose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. He destined us for adoption, as his children through Jesus Christ, according to the desire of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace that he freely bestowed on us\u201d (Eph. 1:4\u20135). In each of these sources, the \u201cdesire of his will\u201d refers to the grace that God bestows upon his elect, for it is God who is \u201cknowing in the ways of all living things\u201d (1.2).<br \/>\nLet us now return to the image of David in these two Genizah folios. Already in antiquity there was a tendency to idealize David, and his stature and power increased greatly. This is already evident in Psalm 89, which exerted a great deal of influence on the description of David in our text. In verse 28 of this psalm, for example, God says \u201cI will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth,\u201d just as the Genizah Psalms describe David as ruler over all kings, having vanquished all his enemies since God supports \u201chis right hand, bearing the sword; giving strength to his arm\u201d (1.25). God further bestows upon David \u201call that kings desire; the might of nations and treasures of kings\u201d (3.15). But David is not just a great warrior who rules over the kings of the earth; he is the king of peace (\u201cYou multiplied justice and righteousness in his day; peace and blessings forever beyond counting\u201d [1.20]), as well as an exemplary man of wisdom (\u201cYou bestow upon your servant your mighty wisdom; he understands all according to your desire\u201d [1.6]). Needless to say, our poet identifies wisdom with the Torah and the commandments: David is concerned with \u201cthe teachings of your mouth,\u201d \u201cyour sacred words,\u201d and \u201cthe commandments of your will\u201d more than any material wealth (2.25, 26, and 27). David\u2019s desire is to \u201cbe in your presence forever\u201d to \u201cpursue your truth every day as is right in your eyes \u2026 knowing the paths of your righteousness\u201d (3.2\u20135). God \u201cmade weighty his teaching upon his servant; his commands by the agency of his trusted messenger. He magnified wisdom and understanding in his heart; great sanctity without measure\u201d (4.6\u20137). He even states that \u201chis knowledge and wisdom are in my heart\u201d (4.19). But note that the source of David\u2019s wisdom is heavenly, bestowed by divine grace: \u201cI take joy in nothing save your teachings and the appearance of your glory\u201d (2.22). David \u201ctrusts in his name and in the glory of the vision and in his holy words, in all the paths of life\u201d (3.26). We have already noted that both according to the Genizah Psalms and the list in the Qumran Psalms Scroll it is divine inspiration that evokes David\u2019s poetry. The appearance of the glory is not a vision but rather his own visionary power inspired by the holy spirit: \u201cOn the fourth day of Iyar I beheld a vision and all his prophecies, and I prayed before the Lord, saying\u201d (4.16), and here lies the genesis of these poems. In this way, the role of inspired psalmist constitutes a sublime unity of the two traditional roles of David\u2014the poet and the prophet. And once again we note that he is a prophet of the eschaton: \u201cYour spirit prophesies through your servant for you draw the end near, it will tarry no more\u201d (1.14). Moreover, he is a prophet to the gentiles: \u201cyou have placed me before you for the sake of the world; you have placed me in your might as a light to the nations\u201d (2.8). As a poet too, David addresses all mankind: \u201che spread your praise to the ends of the earth\u201d (1.16), so that \u201cAll who worship your name are learned of song; all those who believe the words of your servant\u201d (1.8).<br \/>\nAre David\u2019s universal roles as king, prophet, and poet limited to his own historical period, or do they carry over to the end of days? We have already touched on a similar matter when we discussed the Genizah Psalms\u2019 statement that \u201cYou made him greater than all the angels\u201d (1.23). Is this a midrashic statement about the former king of Israel, or perhaps a vision concerning David, the messianic savior of Israel, since there was, as noted, a Jewish belief that the messiah will be greater than the ministering angels. It appears the latter is the case, for after discussing David\u2019s glory as the king who reigns over all the earth, the Genizah psalmist abruptly states: \u201cHis blessed ones speak for all eternity; all the mighty of the earth will bow before him. They will put their trust in the Lord for he has done mighty deeds; no longer going astray after vanity and error. For all will know the Lord, from the mightiest man to the most humble\u201d (3.17\u201319). It is David, then, who will cause all of humanity to accept the kingdom of God, leaving behind their idolatrous ways\u2014\u201cno longer going astray after vanity and error.\u201d At 2.8\u201319 we find a more explicit statement of the same idea, as God places David \u201cas a light to the nations,\u201d and all the rulers of the earth gather to \u201csee the might of your right hand and understand the mystery of your holy teachings,\u201d finally recognizing that all is made through God\u2019s will. All the inhabitants of the earth will learn from David, \u201crepenting their ways to worship you in faith,\u201d greeting God \u201cwith hymns and songs and giving thanks\u201d\u2014perhaps learned from David himself\u2014knowing that \u201cyou, O Lord, created them.\u201d At that time, \u201call who worship idols shall be shamed for they will come to recognize their statues\u201d and idolatry will be banished forever. Clearly, then, the Genizah Psalms cast David as a king, a prophet, and a messiah in the end of days too, at which time he will cause all of humanity to repent, returning them to the God of Israel and banishing idolatry from the world. It would be artificial to separate the historic David from the eschatological one, since the Genizah Psalms merge the two into a single figure.<br \/>\nWas there a Jewish tradition that identified David as the messiah? The Bible emphasizes that God\u2019s covenant with David is eternal: \u201cForever I will keep my steadfast love for him, and my covenant with him will stand firm. I will establish his line for ever, and his throne as long as the heavens endure\u201d (Ps. 89:30\u201331, and see also Isaiah 55:3). Thus it is possible that the name David could refer to the messiah. Thus Jeremiah prophesies that on the day that God frees Israel from the yoke of the nations \u201cthey shall serve the Lord their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them\u201d (Jer. 30:8\u20139). Similarly we find in Ezekiel: \u201cI will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David.\u2026 I, the Lord, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them; I, the Lord, have spoken\u201d (Ezek. 34:23\u201324 and see also 37:24). David\u2019s key role in the eschatological hope of Israel explains his mention in the Second Temple prayers concerning the yearning for redemption. One prominent example is the conclusion to the \u02bfAmidah in its Palestinian version: \u201cBlessed is the God of David, builder of Jerusalem.\u201d Similarly we find in the Gospels that when Jesus entered Jerusalem the crowds praised him by saying: \u201cHosanna! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the kingdom of our ancestor David!\u201d (Mark 11:9\u201310). It is, then, the kingdom of our ancestor David that comes in the name of the Lord. In Matthew the crowds say: \u201cHosanna to the son of David!\u201d (21:9). Interestingly, the grace recorded in the Didache states: \u201cHosanna to the God of David\u201d (Didache 10.6), just like the conclusion of the ancient blessing of Jerusalem. According to Didache 9.2, the blessing of the wine opened with the words: \u201cWe thank you, our Father, for the sacred vine of David.\u201d All these indicate that the early followers of Jesus also mentioned David and the \u201cGod of David\u201d in their prayers, as a way of expressing their hope for redemption.<br \/>\nThe traditional sources clearly indicate, then, that not only was the name \u2018David\u2019 associated with the Messiah, there were those who thought that King David himself was the Messiah. The following, e.g., is cited in the name of Rav: \u201cThe Holy One Blessed Be He will in the future time establish for Israel another David, as it is written, \u2018But they shall serve the Lord their God and David their king, whom I will establish for them\u2019 (Jer. 30:9)\u2014the verse does not say \u2018did establish\u2019 but rather \u2018will establish\u2019.\u201d In this statement the David in question is not the biblical king, but in the Palestinian Talmud we find: \u201cThe sages say, This is the Messiah King\u2014if from among the living, his name is David, if from among the dead his name is David. Rabbi Tanhum says: \u2018I have provided the biblical prooftext: \u201c[He] shows steadfast love to his anointed, to David \u2026\u201d&nbsp;\u2019 (Psalm 18:50; 2 Sam. 22:51)\u201d (p. Berakhot 2.5a, and see also Eikha Rabbati to Lamentations 1:16). Similarly the Kaliri writes in \u05d9\u05e9\u05e2\u05da \u05d0\u05d5\u05de\u05df, a piyyut for hosha\u02bfna rabbah: \u201cThe shoot [\u05e6\u05de\u05d7] of a man, \u2018shoot\u2019 [\u05e6\u05de\u05d7] is his name, he is none other than David.\u201d The biblical verses that appear to identify David as the Messiah undoubtedly play an important role in the shaping of this tradition.<br \/>\nThe identification of David as the Messiah is quite early, and is already evident in the Second Temple disputes between the first Christians, who claimed that Jesus is the Messiah, risen from the dead, and those who argued that David is the Messiah. The Christian polemic against David\u2019s messianic standing is preserved in two versions. The first, Peter\u2019s long oration in Acts 2:24\u201336, and Paul\u2019s shorter statement in Acts 13:32\u201337. Evidently, Luke had before him a fully articulated Christian argument on this matter when he composed Acts. The debate was couched in terms of the interpretation of Psalm 16:8\u201310: \u201cI keep the Lord always before me; because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. Therefore my heart is glad, and my soul rejoices; my body also rests secure. For you do not give me up to Sheol, or let your faithful one see the pit.\u201d The Psalm is identified as a mikhtam to David, but does this mean that David is speaking in the first person, or perhaps these verses are a future prophecy concerning Jesus? Though the word \u2018pit\u2019 in verse 10 is a synonym of Sheol (as the parallelism clearly demonstrates), the Septuagint and other translations render it \u201ccorruption.\u201d In Psalm 16, this interpretation might be supported by the broader context, i.e., the statement \u201cmy body also rests secure\u201d\u2014here understood as not decomposing. This view underlies the dictum of Rabbi Yitzhak: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018my body also rests secure\u2019\u2014this teaches that decomposition and larvae have no dominion over his [David\u2019s] body; \u2018you do not give me up to Sheol\u2019\u2014his flesh will not decompose into dust in the grave; \u2018or let your faithful one see the pit\u2019\u2014he does not even smell the scent of hell.\u201d<br \/>\nThe interpretation offered by Rabbi Yitzhak suggests that David\u2019s flesh did not decompose, as his flesh does not turn to dust in the grave nor indeed does he smell the scent of hell. The early Christians opposed this view, arguing that Psalm 16 could be referring to David since he had died and remained in his grave to this very day. David, moreover, was a prophet and thus it was the resurrection of Jesus that he foretold, as Jesus had not been given up to Sheol, nor his flesh allowed to decompose, for he ascended to heaven. Clearly then the words of Psalm 16 were applied to both Jesus and David. Similarly, we find that Acts (13:33\u201335) applies Psalm 2:7\u2014\u201cYou are my son; today I have begotten you\u201d\u2014to the risen Christ. These same words are used by the sages to refer to the Jewish messiah, and the psalm could quite naturally be interpreted as referring to David, since he was viewed as the author of Psalms and, at least in some circles, as the messiah himself. Acts 13:34 also cites Isaiah 55:3: \u201cI will make with you an everlasting covenant, my steadfast, sure love for David.\u201d This verse too is applied to Jesus, even though it explicitly mentions King David. It appears, then, that there was a series of verses that Acts interpreted as referring to Jesus, while other sources used them as proof of David\u2019s messianic status. The belief in David\u2019s messianism is seen as a core part of Jewish messianism.<br \/>\nCan we provide a clearer picture of the belief or group of beliefs that cast David as the future messiah? The Christian polemic against this view, as reflected in Acts, suggests that there were those who believed that David did not decompose in his grave. Presumably these individuals assumed that during the future resurrection David would physically rise from his grave and fulfill his messianic role. Other views of David\u2019s messianic role, if they existed, no longer exist today. If our interpretation of the apocryphal Genizah Psalms is correct, David, who is both prophet and messiah, will return all the nations to the Lord, forever banishing idolatry from the world.<br \/>\nThus we find that the Psalms of David constitute a real contribution to the ancient polemic between Judaism and Christianity regarding the identity of the messiah (or messiahs), as well as his life and role. It was this polemic that gave rise to Christianity itself. We know that the Qumran scrolls, the Book of Jubilees and the Testaments of the Tribes\u2014all of which are close to the Essene worldview\u2014reflect the belief in three messiahs: an eschatological messiah, along with the messiahs of Aaron and Israel. The latter, who comes from the House of David, is less important than the Messiah of the House of Aaron. Why the diminished role of the House of David relative to the House of Aaron? Is it simply a function of the priestly orientation of this religious group? Or is the emphasis on Aaron part of a polemic against those who elevate the messianic role of the Davidic messiah\u2014and perhaps of David himself? Whatever the answer, it was in Qumran that the Psalms Scroll was preserved, including those apocryphal psalms attributed to David himself. We have already noted that one of these psalms (24.6) contains the phrase \u201ctrue judge\u201d which also appears in the Genizah Psalms (4.12), and that the author of the Genizah Psalms beseeches God, saying \u201cDo not deny me this request; fulfill my request as though it were the wish of your will\u201d (3.4). In the Qumran Psalm Scroll we find a very similar phrase, one that is wholly unattested in the Bible: \u201cBend your ear and grant my plea, and what I ask, do not deny me\u201d (24.4\u20135). The striking similarity strengthens our hypothesis that the Genizah Psalms were originally part of the Qumran library.<br \/>\nBy way of conclusion, we note the similarity between the \u201cGenizah psalms\u201d and two apocryphal books\u20141 Enoch and Pseudo-Philo\u2019s Biblical Antiquities. In chapter 51, Enoch describes the future resurrection of \u201cthe righteous and the holy ones,\u201d adding: \u201cIn those days, the Elect One shall sit on my throne, and from the conscience of his mouth shall come out all the secrets of wisdom, for the Lord of the Spirits has given them to him and glorified him\u201d (1 Enoch 51:3). Later on in the book we find: \u201cThese kings, governors, and all the landlords shall try to bless, glorify, extol him who rules over everything\u201d (1 Enoch 62:6). Pseudo-Philo\u2019s Biblical Antiquities\u2014of which only a Latin translation is extant\u2014tells the history of Israel from Adam to the days of King David. As part of this survey, the text includes two psalms that it attributes to King David (59:4 and all of chapter 60). In the Genizah Psalms, David says of his election: \u201cA cornerstone despised by the builders you have raised to the headstone above all nations\u201d (1.18), while in Biblical Antiquities he says: \u201cGod hath kept me, and hath delivered me unto his angels and his watchers to keep me, for my brethren envied me, and my father and my mother made me of no account, and when the prophet came they called not for me, and when the Lord\u2019s anointed was proclaimed they forgot me\u201d (Biblical Antiquities 59:4). The author states that God\u2019s angels guard over David, while in the Genizah Psalms we read: \u201cYou made him greater than all the angels, establishing him as king of all nations forever\u201d (1.23). Another striking parallel involves the image of a light to the nations. In the Genizah Psalms we find: \u201cyou have placed me in your might as a light to the nations\u201d (2.8), and the same phrase appears in Biblical Antiquities (according to the main manuscript) in the apocryphal hymn of Hannah (51:6), where it is applied to David and to the prophet Samuel, Hannah\u2019s son. The same chapter contains a universalistic description of Samuel, very much in the vein of the Genizah Psalms: \u201cCome ye at my voice, all ye peoples, and give ear unto my speech, all ye kingdoms.\u2026 I utter my words openly, for out of me shall arise the ordinance of the Lord, and all men shall find the truth\u201d (51.3\u20134; and compare Genizah Psalms 2.19, 3.17\u201319). We may conclude, then, that even though the Genizah Psalms demonstrate a marked affinity to the world of the Essenes, the portrait they sketch of the prophet David, along with their universal tone, accords with the environment that produced Biblical Antiquities.<\/p>\n<p>18.      The \u201cFlesh-Spirit\u201d Dualism in the Qumran Scrolls and the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars wishing to locate the origin of the Flesh-Spirit dualism in the New Testament could be divided into three broad positions: i. The Bible and its anthropology; ii. Greek dualism, beginning with Plato, that distinguishes the material and the spiritual, with the body relegated to the former; iii Gnosticism, which also contrasts the material body to the spirit. The question, then, is whether the views enunciated in the early church, particularly in the Pauline epistles and in the Gospel of John, are independent or perhaps an outgrowth of one of these three views. The language of the New Testament is influenced by the biblical \u201cflesh\u201d and \u201cspirit,\u201d but it is still possible that the Christian dualism is a \u201cpseudomorphosis\u201d of biblical anthropology. Recently, P. Beno\u00eet has rejected the attempts to find Greek influence on the New Testament, arguing rather that it contains the \u201canthropological monism that is unique to the Semitic and biblical worldview.\u201d<br \/>\nThe discovery of the Scrolls provided new impetus for the complex analysis of the flesh-spirit dichotomy, even inciting a scholarly debate. To my mind, the proper solution lies in examining the theological meaning of the views concerning flesh and spirit in the Scrolls and in the New Testament, comparing the two, and only then proceeding to discuss other conceptual systems. I believe this approach leads to the conclusion that the Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament speak with one voice with regard to the flesh-spirit dichotomy, a voice that is different from the biblical, Greek, and Gnostic dualisms of spirit and matter.<br \/>\nOne evident difference between the worldview of the Scrolls and the New Testament, on the one hand, and certain Greek and Gnostic positions, on the other, is that the former do not contain any principled opposition to matter as such. The Qumran Scrolls even contain some positive statements concerning the material world: \u201cHe created man to rule the world\u201d (1QS 3.17\u201318, and see Hodayot 9.15). The \u201cwondrous mysteries\u201d governing the creation of the world in all its fullness and eternal laws, are proof of God\u2019s glory and sole government over all (Hodayot 9.7\u201320), and the \u201cjust judgments\u201d of God highlight the nullity of man (Hodayot 9.21\u201327). Though not as positive as the Qumran Scrolls published thus far, the New Testament\u2019s ambivalent estimation of the physical world (kosmos) does not stem from the negation of the world as such, but rather from the negation of the world inasmuch as it is ruled by Satan. The Scrolls, too, hold that the present age is \u201cthe days of Belial\u2019s dominion\u201d (1QS 2.19; 1.23; and see CD 4.12\u201313; 6.14; 12.23; 1QpHab 5.7), and thus the conclusion that the world \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice until the time appointed for the judgment decided\u201d (1QS 4.19\u201320). It is possible, then, that the negative attitude toward the physical world voiced in the New Testament is a more severe version of the views of the Qumran community.<br \/>\nClearly, neither the Scrolls nor the New Testament can promote an absolute negation of the world, since both believe in a good and beneficent creator God. It is possible, then, that it was the Jewish heritage of these texts that limited the broader \u201cspirit-matter\u201d dualism to \u201cspirit-flesh.\u201d This hypothesis is apparently confirmed by the fact that the Hebrew word for flesh, \u05d1\u05e9\u05e8, does not appear in the Qumran Scrolls in the New Testament sense except in the Hodayot and the psalm that concludes the Manual of Discipline. Davies noticed this as well and suggested that most of the Scrolls belong to an earlier stage in the history of the Qumran community, before Hellenistic influences altered its worldview, while the Hodayot belong to a later, more Hellenized stage. I too have argued that the Hodayot and the concluding psalm of the Manual of Discipline are relatively light, based on their unique anthropology along with other considerations. I believe, however, that the differences between these texts are the result of an internal evolution, rather than the spirit-matter dualism of Greek and Gnostic thought.<br \/>\nThe religious worldview of Qumran divides humanity into two camps: the sons of light and the sons of darkness. The sons of light, who are ultimately the members of the Qumran community, are marked by the spirit of truth, while the sons of darkness inhabit the spirit of wickedness. God \u201cestablished every deed, and on their paths every labor\u201d (1QS 3.25\u201326). Just like the Gospel of John (14:26), the Qumran writings identify the spirit of truth with the holy spirit (1QS 4.21; 3.6\u20137). This spirit, then, which the Scrolls (like the New Testament) refer to on occasion as \u2018spirit\u2019 as such, is the gift that God bestows upon his elect: \u201cFor it is by the spirit of the true counsel of God that are atoned the paths of man, all his iniquities, so that he can look at the light of life. And it is by the holy spirit of the community, in its truth, that he is cleansed of all his iniquities\u201d (1QS 3.6\u20138). Indeed, for the Dead Sea community, \u201cyou have stretched out your holy spirit to cover up guilt\u201d (Hodayot 23.13).<br \/>\nI believe that this view\u2014the ethical dualism of Qumran alongside the doctrine of divine grace and election\u2014is the root from which grows the Hodayot dualism between spirit and flesh. The spirit purifies man from his debased\u2014which is his natural\u2014state. Man is \u201ca creature of clay, fashioned with water, a foundation of shame \u2026 a building of sin, a spirit of error and depravity without knowledge\u201d (Hodayot 9.21\u201323). He is a base creature, governed by his sinful desires, \u201cimpure abominations and guilt of unfaithfulness\u201d (Hodayot 19.11). The Qumran Scrolls refer to the sinful nature of man with the biblical \u05d1\u05e9\u05e8, \u2018flesh,\u2019 arguing that \u201cI belong to evil humankind, to the assembly of unfaithful flesh\u201d (1QS 11.9). First Corinthians, \u201care you not of the flesh and behaving according to human inclinations?\u201d (3:3), indicates that Paul too sees the flesh and human nature as one and the same. The phrase \u201csin of the flesh\u201d in the Community Rule (1QS 11.12) is reminiscent of Romans 8:3, while the Christian phrases \u201c\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 (\u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76)\u201d and \u201c\u1f21 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2\u201d parallel in language and content \u201cthe inclination of the flesh\u201d (yetzer basar) of Hodayot 18.25.<br \/>\nThis particular sense of \u201cflesh\u201d refers to the unredeemed within man, \u201cthe assembly of flesh,\u201d from whom God has hidden wisdom and knowledge; but \u201cto those whom God has selected he has given them as everlasting possession\u201d (1QS 11.7). In Ephesians too we read: \u201cAll of us once lived among [those who are disobedient] in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of flesh and senses, and were by nature children of wrath, like everyone else. But \u2026 by grace you have been saved [see also Romans 7:5] \u2026 so that in the ages to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus\u201d (Eph. 2:3\u20137). The author of the Hodayot conceives of man\u2019s election in a similar way: \u201cFor the sake of your glory, you have purified man from offence, so that he can make himself holy for you from every impure abomination and guilt of unfaithfulness\u201d (Hodayot 19.10\u201311).<br \/>\nWe saw above that for the Qumran community, the spirit purifies man of his iniquities, elevating him from the realm of the flesh. A similar position is found in Paul\u2019s letter to the Romans: \u201cThos who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh; you are in the spirit, since the spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the spirit of Christ does not belong to him\u201d (Rom. 8:8\u20139).<br \/>\nThe theological basis for the flesh-spirit dualism is not, then, the deeper dichotomy of matter and spirit, but rather the view that God elevates his elect from a debased state\u2014from the reality of \u201cflesh\u201d\u2014by endowing him with spirit, i.e., with the spirit of truth (following the dualistic terminology of the Scrolls) or, in the biblical phraseology regular in the Scrolls, the holy spirit. It would be a worthwhile endeavor to examine\u2014to the extent that such an examination is possible\u2014whether all the New Testament passages that contrast the flesh and the spirit accord with this view. The author of the Hodayot summarizes his religious outlook regarding the flesh and the spirit in a beautiful and concise passage:<\/p>\n<p>What is flesh compared to this? What creature of clay can do wonders? He is in iniquity from his maternal womb, and in guild of unfaithfulness right to old age. But I know that justice does not belong to man nor to a son of Adam a perfect path. To God Most High belong all the acts of justice, and the path of man is not secure except by the spirit which God creates for him to perfect the path of the sons of Adam so that all his creatures come to know the strength of his power and the abundance of his compassion with all the sons of his approval. (Hodayot 12.29\u201333)<\/p>\n<p>This view is certainly similar (though not identical) to the Hellenistic and Gnostic conceptions, in which man is represented as constituted of two warring elements\u2014the spirit and the flesh\u2014with the latter a prison of sorts for the former, denying its most sublime aspirations. The difference lies in the fact that in the Hodayot and the New Testament, the dualism is the result of the presence or absence of God\u2019s spirit within the otherwise carnal man. I believe that the notion that it is the holy spirit that turns the carnal man into one of the elect is theologically autocratic; there is no need to resort to Hellenistic (and Gnostic) matter-spirit dualism to explain it.<br \/>\nThat said, there is no question that the practical conclusions the Hodayot yield are close to a matter-spirit dualism, and so it is possible that there is contamination between the two approaches. Proof of this is provided by a passage in the Wisdom of Solomon:<\/p>\n<p>For who can learn the counsel of God? Or who can discern what the Lord wills? For the reasoning of mortals is worthless, and our designs are likely to fail; for a perishable body weighs down the soul, and this earthy tent burdens the thoughtful mind. We can hardly guess at what is on earth, and what is at hand we find with labor; but who has traced out what is in the heavens? Who has learned your counsel, unless you have given wisdom and sent your holy spirit from on high? And thus the paths of those on earth were set right, and people were taught what pleases you, and were saved by wisdom. (9:13\u201318)<\/p>\n<p>The view of this passage is theologically identical with that of the Hodayot, which state, e.g.:<\/p>\n<p>What, then, is man? He is nothing but earth. [From clay] he is fashioned and to dust he will return. But you teach him about wonders like these and the foundations of your truth you show to him. I am dust and ashes, what can I plan if you do not wish it? What can I devise without your will? How can I be strong if you do not make me stand? How can I be learned if you do not mould me? (Hodayot 18.3\u20137; see also 20.11\u201313 and 7.21\u201322).<\/p>\n<p>The Wisdom of Solomon passage is particularly close to Hodayot 12.29\u201330, which we cited above (see also 20.32\u201334). If the author of Wisdom of Solomon states that the giving of the holy spirit sets straight the paths of man (\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bf\u1f55\u03c4\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b9\u03c9\u03c1\u03b8\u03ce\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b1\u1f31 \u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b2\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b3\u1fc6\u03c2), this may even be a Greek translation of Hebrew phrases like the one found in Hodayot 12.31\u201332: \u201cthe path of man is not secure except by the spirit which God creates for him to perfect the path of the sons of Adam.\u201d<br \/>\nThe author of Wisdom of Solomon added two elements to the conceptual system already familiar from the Scrolls: first, he identified the holy spirit with wisdom, which is the main subject of his composition; second, he superimposed the Greek \u201cspirit-matter\u201d dualism onto the \u201cspirit-flesh\u201d division. Indeed, scholars have already noted that the verse \u201cfor a perishable body weighs down the soul, and this earthy tent burdens the thoughtful mind\u201d (Wisdom of Solomon 9:15) is quite similar to Plato\u2019s famous statement in the Phaedo: \u201cthe corporeal is heavy, oppressive, earthly, and visible. So the soul which is tainted by its presence is weighed down and dragged back into the visible world\u201d (81c). The fusion of Greek philosophy and Jewish writings is made possible by the biblical view\u2014quoted approvingly in the Dead Sea Scrolls\u2014that \u201cWhat, then, is man? He is nothing but earth. From clay he is fashioned and to dust he will return\u201d (Hodayot 18.3\u20134).<br \/>\nThe Wisdom of Solomon passage adopts an interesting epistemological stance, according to which man can understand God\u2019s counsel only if God sends his holy spirit to man. This is also the Qumran view as expressed in the Hodayot: not only does the holy spirit purify the elect of the charge of deception, but it is also the only instrument through which the elect can receive true knowledge, i.e., knowledge of the mysteries of God\u2019s dominion in the world, and knowledge of God himself: \u201cAnd I \u2026 have known you, my God, through the spirit which you gave in me\u201d (1QH 20.11\u201313). Knowledge of God originates in God, as we also see in the common formula \u201cThese things I know through your knowledge\u201d (1QH 6.12; 7.12; 9.21; 1QM 10.16). For instance, \u201cThese things I know through your knowledge, for you opened my ears to wondrous mysteries although I am a creature of clay, fashioned with water\u201d (1QH 9.21). Carnal man is unable to understand the divine secrets without receiving the holy spirit, for \u201cWhat is someone born of a woman among all your awesome works? He is a structure of dust fashioned with water, his counsel is the iniquity of sin, shame of dishonor and source of impurity and a depraved spirit rules over him\u201d (1QH 5.20\u201322, and see also 7.21\u201322; 18.3\u20137). After all, \u201cwhat is the spirit of flesh to understand all these matters and to have insight into your wondrous and great counsel?\u201d (1QH 5.19\u201320). All other mortals have the \u201cspirit of flesh,\u201d but the elect can gain true knowledge through the divine spirit that he has been granted: \u201cAnd I, your servant, have known thanks to the spirit you have placed in me\u201d (1QH 5.24\u201325).<br \/>\nDespite the difference in details, Paul\u2019s doctrine in 1 Corinthians (2:6\u20133:1) may serve as a systematic explanation of the hints scattered throughout the Hodayot suggesting that the flesh does not know God, only the spirit that God has granted his elect. Like the wisdom of the Qumranites, the Christian wisdom is \u201csecret and hidden \u2026 which God decreed before the ages for our glory\u201d and which \u201cGod has prepared for those who love him\u201d:<\/p>\n<p>[These things] God has revealed to us through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what human being knows what is truly human except the human spirit that is within? So also no one comprehends what is truly God\u2019s except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. (1 Cor. 2:6\u201312)<\/p>\n<p>The statement \u201cwe have received not the spirit of the world\u201d is strongly reminiscent of Hodayot 4.25, \u201cfor your servant is [not] a spirit of flesh.\u201d As noted, Christianity\u2019s hostile tone toward \u201cthe world\u201d distinguishes it from the Qumran literature, and it is therefore possible that the phrase \u201cspirit of the world\u201d means the same thing to an early Christian as \u201cspirit of flesh\u201d to a Qumran member. Moreover, the phrase \u201cpeople of the flesh,\u201d which occurs further on in 1 Corinthians (2:14)\u2014those who are unable to grasp the words of God\u2019s spirit (in contrast to the people of the spirit)\u2014is identical in meaning to the person of the flesh (3:1). It seems reasonable, then, that the \u201cspirit\u201d of \u201cthe people of the spirit\u201d is nothing other than Paul\u2019s \u201cspirit of the world\u201d and the \u201cspirit of the flesh\u201d of Hodayot (4.25).<br \/>\nBut if the gift of spirit elevates the Qumran elect from the realm of the flesh, even to the point that he can state that \u201cyour servant is [not] a spirit of flesh\u201d (1QH 4.25), how can he still sin in \u201cthe sin of the flesh\u201d (1QS 11.12)? How can the author of the Manual of Discipline state that \u201cI belong to evil humankind, to the assembly of unfaithful flesh; my failings, my iniquities, my sins \u2026 with the depravities of my heart\u201d (1QS 11.9)? This paradox is resolved if we understand that, while he has been elevated out of the realm of the flesh, he still remains a creature of flesh. A similar dialectic is evident in Paul\u2019s theology. For Paul speaks of the time \u201cwhile we were living in the flesh\u201d (Rom. 7:5) as belonging to the past, while at the same time exhorting his hearers: \u201cLive by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh. For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want\u201d (Gal. 5:16\u201317).<br \/>\nIndeed, the Qumran community and the early church maintain a dialectic position not only with regard to the flesh, but with regard to the spirit as well. Even though he received the spirit when he entered the Qumran community (1QH 6.13), the elect may still \u201clook for the spirit\u201d (1QH 8.14). In much the same way, one receives the spirit when he becomes a Christian but nonetheless yearns for the gifts of the spirit (1 Cor. 14:1). After all, the spiritual standing of the elect is not fixed, but rather can fluctuate for better and for worse. Paul cannot speak with the Christians in Corinth as with people of the spirit, for they are still of the flesh: \u201cFor as long as there is jealousy and quarrelling among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving according to human inclinations?\u201d (1 Cor. 3:3). The struggle between carnal human nature and the God-given spirit is typical of the elect.<br \/>\nThis view\u2014that the spirit purifies the elect of the sins of the flesh\u2014introduces a new wrinkle into the typical Qumran dichotomy of the sons of light and the sons of darkness. For one might conclude that the sons of light are God\u2019s elect who have been granted the spirit, while those destined for damnation reside in the realm of the sins of the flesh. This is Paul\u2019s position in Romans: \u201cFor those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit\u201d (8:5) and \u201cFor all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God\u201d (8:14; see also Galatians 4:6). John expresses the same idea in much starker terms: \u201cWhat is born of the flesh is flesh, and what is born of the Spirit is spirit\u201d (John 3:6). And if the realm of the spirit suits the lot of light and the realm of the flesh the lot of darkness, it is clear why Ephesians\u2014which refers to the Christian community as \u201csons of light\u201d\u2014speaks of \u201cthe fruit of light\u201d and \u201cthe deeds of darkness\u201d (5:8\u201311), while Galatians employs the terms \u201cfruit of the spirit\u201d and \u201cdeeds of the flesh\u201d (5:19\u201323). Galatians also enumerates the deeds of the flesh and the fruit of the spirit, producing two contrary lists of wicked and righteous traits, respectively\u2014lists that are very similar in content and literary form to the lists of the ways of the spirits of light and of darkness in 1QS 4.2\u201314. Interestingly, the Qumran scrolls published thus far do not contain the explicit identification of the realm of the good with the spirit and the realm of evil with the flesh. Is this identification a novel conclusion reached by the Christian community, or was there precedent in the Qumran community or affiliated groups?<br \/>\nWe have seen, then, that the Qumran Hodayot present a flesh-spirit contrast that is similar to the dualistic tendencies we find in the early church. The dualism of both the church and Qumran is rooted in the idea that God grants the holy spirit to his elect, and it allows them to overcome their innately sinful flesh, which is part of human nature as such. As noted, from a theological perspective the dualism in question is completely autocratic; there is no need to assume that it was formed under the influence of the matter-spirit dualism that is typical of certain Greek and Gnostic schools of thought. That said, there is an undeniable community in the conclusions drawn by both the Scrolls and the early church, on the one hand, and the Greek and Gnostic thinkers, on the other, with regard to human nature. As such, there could be instances of conflation, as we in fact saw in the Wisdom of Solomon passage cited above. Any attempt to blur the differences between flesh-spirit dualism and matter-spirit dualism poses a real risk to the Jewish and Christian belief in a good and beneficent God who is the creator of the material world. It is not surprising, then, that \u201cThe Assumption of Moses\u201d\u2014a Jewish book that espouses Qumran-like views regarding dualism and predestination\u2014dramatically rejects the idea that the body is the realm of Satan. The leaders of the forces of good and evil, the archangel Michael and Satan, respectively, fight over Moses\u2019 body. Satan claim ownership on the grounds that he is the ruler of the material world, but Michael responds that all were created through God\u2019s holy spirit, for God is lord of the spirits and of all flesh. \u201cThe Assumption of Moses\u201d was most likely composed in the days of Paul and Simon Magus, one of the first Gnostics, and it is Gnostic\u2014not Greek\u2014dualism that the book so forcefully rejects. For it is only Gnosticism that portrays matter not only as the element that inhibits the spirit, but as the realm governed by satanic forces. Is this Gnostic approach, which opposes the view of the Qumran scrolls and of the New Testament, an outgrowth of Greek dualism? Or is it a combination of Qumran dualism\u2014which holds that the flesh is the very human nature that the elect overcomes with the help of the spirit, and that the world \u201chas been defiled in paths of wickedness during the dominion of injustice\u201d (1QS 4.19)\u2014with the Greek dualism of matter (including the physical body) and spirit?<\/p>\n<p>19.      \u201cThe Secret Things Belong to the Lord\u201d (Deut. 29:29): Ben Sira and the Essenes<\/p>\n<p>A fascinating article that appeared recently in Tarbiz discusses the verse \u201cThe secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the revealed things belong to us and to our children forever; to observe all the words of this law\u201d (Deut. 29:29). The authors focus on the interpretation of the verse in rabbinic literature, and its importance in the history of the Qumran community, which is, in my view, an Essene sect. Among other sources they mention a well-known passage from Ben Sira 3:21\u201324: \u201cNeither seek what is too difficult for you, nor investigate what is beyond your power. Reflect upon what you have been commanded, for the secret things are not your concern. Do not meddle in matters that are beyond you, for more than you can understand has been shown you. For their conceit has led many astray, and wrong opinion has impaired their judgment.\u201d<br \/>\nBen Sira\u2019s words appear to be based on Psalm 19:12: \u201cBut who can detect their errors? Clear me from hidden faults.\u201d The Hebrew \u05e9\u05d2\u05d9\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea, \u2018errors,\u2019 can also be vocalized \u05e9\u05b7\u05c2\u05d2\u05b4\u05bc \u05d9\u05d0\u05d5\u05ea, that is, \u2018elevated matters,\u2019 and apparently this is the reading that underlies Ben Sira\u2019s exhortation not to \u201cmeddle in matters that are beyond you.\u201d In other words, he interpreted Psalm 19 as asking, Who can understand sublime matters? Clear me of the desire to know hidden things.<br \/>\nThe words of Ben Sira played an important and well-established role in the thought of the rabbis, who rightly interpreted them as a warning against esoteric speculation. They are also clear evidence that nistarot, \u2018secret things,\u2019 was an established term for esoterica already in Ben Sira\u2019s time, causing the rational author to warn his readers against such mystical inclinations. The question remains, however, whether Psalm 19 is the only influence at work here, or perhaps Deuteronomy 29:29 also played a part. It seems to me the latter is the case, for how else can we explain his statement to \u201creflect upon what you have been commanded, for the secret things are not your concern\u201d\u2014for the secret things belong to the Lord, but the revealed things belong to us and to our children forever. We are not permitted to investigate the secret things (for they belong to the Lord our God) but only the revealed things (for they belong to us and to our children). This is the limit of our investigation, \u201cfor more than you can understand has been shown you\u201d\u2014even the revealed things are ultimately beyond our grasp.<br \/>\nShemesh and Werman make a novel, intriguing argument: the Qumran sect assumed that certain religious rules, previously hidden from Israel, had been revealed to them. In other words, the secret things that once belonged \u201cto the Lord our God,\u201d now \u201cbelong to us and to our children,\u201d i.e. the sectarian legal rules. Is this the full story, or just a partial picture? Even if we accept the claim that the Qumran texts interpreted the Deuteronomy verse as referring solely to their sectarian doctrines, it is still the case that the revelation of commandments that had been hidden from Israel constitutes just one aspect of the Qumran community\u2019s broader tend toward insularity and partial esotericism of its doctrines.<br \/>\nIt appears that Josephus\u2019 statement concerning the Essenes does not refer to esoteric matters (that could not be revealed to individuals who were not full members of the community), but rather open issues that could not be hidden from others. For example, the halakhic principles that guided the Essene way of life, or core elements of their worldview\u2014dualism and predestination. Still, Josephus himself allows that the Essenes maintained some matters hidden from the outside world, though his formulation is\u2014perhaps intentionally\u2014vague. In the Manual of Discipline the member of the community is commanded to \u201chide the counsel of the law in the midst of the men of injustice (=the outside world)\u201d (1QS 9.17). Licht, in his commentary, suggests that this is the only explicit instruction to keep the doctrines of the community secret, though the matter is alluded to in a number of other passages, e.g., \u201cof concealment concerning the truth of the mysteries of knowledge\u201d (1QS 4.6). Moreover, it must be recalled that the description of the Essenes as a pacifist and humanitarian community cast in the mold of Tolstoy\u2014a description found in the writings of Josephus and Philo alike\u2014is fundamentally wrong, and this mistake derives from the Essenes themselves. The Qumran members speak a very different language amongst themselves, prescribing \u201ceverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201322).<br \/>\nAs we saw above, already in Ben Sira\u2019s time, the beginning of the second century B.C.E., there were esoteric \u201csecret things\u201d against which Ben Sira warns. The Essene Qumran community was a sect that considered part of its doctrines esoteric. Indeed, one might suggest that the tendency toward esotericism was fundamental to the Qumran worldview, as it is undoubtedly linked to Essene dualism, to the isolation of the community from the outside, to the doctrine of predestination, and to the belief that the community consists of God\u2019s elect. As noted, the rules of conduct that governed the community were plainly visible, and so the community developed the notion that these are secret teachings that have now come to light. Furthermore, as noted, it was impossible to hide their doctrine of predestination.<br \/>\nEven though the Qumran community (like the rabbinic sages) accepted the view that biblical prophecy had ended and hoped for its imminent renewal, its members felt that they must \u201cbe united in the counsel of God and walk in perfection in his sight, complying with all revealed things concerning the regulated times of their stipulations\u201d (1QS 1.8\u20139). In other words, like present-day Mormons, the Qumran Essenes believed there was within them an ongoing divine revelation that guided them in matters of faith and instructed them concerning their shifting relationship with the broader Jewish community and the outside world as a whole. Hence the obligation of each member of the community to share with his colleagues the content of his personal revelation: \u201cAnd every matter hidden from Israel but which has been found out by the Interpreter, he should not keep hidden from them for fear of a spirit of desertion\u201d (1QS 8.11\u201312; see also the Damascus Document 15.13\u201315). The aforementioned \u2018Interpreter\u2019 is, in Hebrew, \u05d4\u05d3\u05d5\u05e8\u05e9 \u05d4\u05d0\u05d9\u05e9, the one who is doresh, suggesting that esoteric scriptural interpretation plays an important role in Qumran\u2019s theology of ongoing revelation. The Manual of Discipline goes on to argue that one must \u201cbe segregated from within the dwelling of the men of sin to walk to the desert in order to open there His path. As it is written: \u2018In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God\u2019 (Isa. 40:3). This is the study of the law which he commanded through the hand of Moses, in order to act in compliance with all that has been revealed from age to age, and according to what the prophets have revealed through his holy spirit\u201d (1QS 8.13\u201316). The path referred to by Isaiah is, then, the interpretation of the Torah.<br \/>\nAs for the phrase \u2018according to what the prophets have revealed through his holy spirit,\u2019 it doubtless refers first and foremost to the prophets\u2019 ability to understand present and future events. Did the author of this passage believe that biblical prophecy contains secret teachings that can be revealed through scriptural interpretation? That indeed is the Essene position. Josephus, for example, notes that there are those among the Essenes who are able to foretell future events by immersing themselves in holy writ, undergoing various purification rituals, and studying the words of the prophets. Pesher Habakkuk attributes this very ability to the Teacher of Righteousness, the founder of the Qumran community. Thus the pesher to Habakkuk 1 speaks of \u201cviolators of the covenant who will not believe when they hear all that is going to happen to the final generation, from the mouth of the priest whom God has placed within the Community, to foretell the fulfillment of all the words of his servants, the prophets, by means of whom God has declared all that is going to happen to his people Israel\u201d (1QpHab 2.6\u201310). It appears that the sectarian Pesher interpretation is a novel approach pioneered by the priest, that is, the Teacher of Righteousness. This is confirmed by the pesher\u2019s interpretation of Habakkuk 2:2: \u201c&nbsp;\u2018Then the Lord answered me and said: Write the vision; make it plain on tablets so that a runner may read it.\u2019 And God told Habakkuk to write what was going to happen to the last generation, but he did not let him know the consummation of the era. And as for what he says \u2018so that a runner may read it,\u2019 its interpretation concerns the Teacher of Righteousness, to whom God has made known all the mysteries of the words of his servants, the prophets\u201d (1QpHab 6.14\u20137.5).<br \/>\nAccording to this pesher, \u201cso that a runner may read it\u201d refers to the Teacher of Righteousness, who will arise in future days. He is the reader who will \u201crun\u201d through the revealed teachings of the prophets, discovering in them all their secret teachings. The prophets themselves were only granted divine inspiration sufficient for the literal sense, but God did not reveal to Habakkuk \u201cwhat was going to happen to the last generation.\u201d God instead decreed that the priestly Teacher of Righteousness be the one \u201cto foretell the fulfillment of all the words of his servants, the prophets.\u201d Note, moreover, that the actions of the Teacher of Righteousness are alluded to in the very words of Habakkuk: \u201cso that a runner may read it.\u201d The running image recalls the Manual of Discipline (8.14\u201316), where Isaiah 40:3 \u201cIn the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God\u201d is interpreted as alluding to the sectarian \u201cdoresh ha-torah\u201d the expounder of the law. Does this mean that the Qumran pesher writings are part of the secret things that are not to be revealed to others? Whatever the answer, it is clear that one of the core teachings of the Qumran community was \u201cto act in compliance with all that has been revealed from age to age\u201d (1QS 8.15, and see also 9.1). The ideological and halakhic correlation is the role of the Instructor, the maskil (see 1QS 9.12\u201326). According to Licht, this refers to the commandments that are known solely to the Qumran community, and are intended for particular ages\u2014every age and its commandments. In my opinion, phrases such as \u201crevealed from age to age,\u201d \u201cthe regulated times of their stipulations\u201d\u2014phrases that refer to the shifting epochs\u2014are tied primarily to the ideological flexibility of the sect, which allowed its members to adapt their behavior to the surrounding circumstances and Zeitgeist. The Qumranites saw the changes in their outlook \u201cfrom age to age\u201d as the result of revelation, and there is no question that the \u201claw of the time\u201d was hidden from outsiders, at least as far as maintaining a fa\u00e7ade of amicability toward the outside world was concerned. This is stated explicitly in the Manual of Discipline: \u201cAnd these are the regulations of behavior of the Inspector in these times, concerning his love and his hatred; everlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit. To them he should leave goods and handmade items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed before someone domineering him. He should be a man enthusiastic for the decree of the time, for the day of revenge\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201324). In two fragments from the Damascus Document the Essenes say of themselves: \u201cHe uncovered their eyes for hidden things and they opened their ears and heard profound things and understood everything that happens before it comes upon them\u201d (4Q266 [=4QDa] 2.5\u20136).<br \/>\nIt is true, then, that the Qumran community was in some way esoteric, but it is difficult to establish which of the doctrines could not be circulated to the outside world or, alternately, which of the doctrines they were able to keep secret. Their belief in predestination and their legal rulings\u2014at least many of them\u2014were well known to outsiders. The hatred toward the \u201cmen of the pit\u201d was not widely known. Similarly, the Essenes succeeded in hiding the pesher literature from the outside world, along with their political views and their eschatological doctrines. We must also bear in mind that the difficulty in distinguishing the truly esoteric from the semi-revealed\u2014and between the desire to conceal and true concealment\u2014is not unique to the Qumran Essenes, but rather characteristic of all \u201cmystic\u201d groups.<\/p>\n<p>20.      The Jewish Origins of the Early Church\u2019s Attitude toward the State<\/p>\n<p>When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire, it was guided in part by Paul\u2019s words in his Epistle to the Romans: \u201cLet every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God \u2026 therefore, whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, for those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad \u2026\u201d (Rom. 13:1\u20133). In the centuries that followed, the division between the secular government and the church became much more marked, but Paul\u2019s teaching was again to become the basis of a religious worldview with the establishment of the Lutheran church. Paul\u2019s words in Romans are, then, very significant and a proper understanding of their intellectual sources is a desideratum inasmuch as it may shed new light on this important Christian doctrine, and shed light on the afterlife of a sectarian Jewish group within the church.<br \/>\nA number of scholars have noted the similarity between Paul\u2019s \u201cthere is no authority except from God\u201d and the position Josephus attributes to the Essenes, namely, that they vow \u201cto keep faith (or loyalty) with all, especially those in power, since no one attains power without God\u201d (BJ 2.140). It is only since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls that this similarity can be properly explicated, as these texts provide a more comprehensive view of the Essene position vis-\u00e0-vis the secular government.<br \/>\nThe Dead Sea community developed a unique theological worldview. It adhered to predestination, or, in their words: \u201cFrom the God of knowledge stems all there is and all there shall be. Before they existed he established their entire design. And when they have come into being, at their appointed time, they will execute all their works according to his glorious design, without altering anything\u201d (1QS 3.15\u201316). This view was, in turn, tied to the division of mankind into the sons of light and the sons of darkness, with each individual\u2019s fate already determined at the time of creation. God, moreover, decreed hatred between the two camps: \u201cGod has sorted them into equal parts until the last time, and has put an everlasting loathing between their divisions. Deeds of injustice are an abhorrence to truth and all the paths of truth are an abhorrence to injustice\u201d (1QS 4.16\u201317). In the end of days, however, evil will be forever destroyed and with it all the sons of darkness. Needless to say, the Essene community in the Judean Desert counted themselves among the sons of light, God\u2019s elect, while the rest of mankind\u2014including all Jews who refuse to join with them\u2014are the sons of darkness, destined for annihilation.<br \/>\nThis brief survey clarifies why the community that understood itself to be living in the end of days dreamt of its war against the sons of darkness, and imagined its conquest of Israel and then the world. For \u201cthis will be the day determined by him since ancient times for the war of extermination against the sons of darkness\u201d (1QM 1.10). Still, the community had to determine how best to live prior to the arrival of this day, that is, in the corrupt world governed by the sons of darkness. The belief in predestination, which found expression in their activist spirit, also guided them in adopting a passive approach toward the wicked government of their day. After all, God\u2019s elect must understand that the course of history is a matter of divine will and decree, and that there is no other path to political power. God has fixed the course of world history, dividing it into different ages, and has divulged these mysteries to the Qumran community. Thus, the Instructor, the maskil must \u201cfulfill the will of God in compliance with all revelation for every period; he should acquire all the wisdom that has been gained according to the periods and the decree of the period\u201d (1QS 9.13\u201314). What, then, is the proper behavior toward the surrounding world? \u201cAnd these are the regulations of behavior of the Inspector in these times, concerning his love and his hatred; everlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit. To them he should leave goods and handmade items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed before someone domineering him.\u201d The Qumran member was to hate the surrounding world of evil, but also to submit to the authorities all the same, since the day of judgment has not yet come; he must, then, \u201cbe a man enthusiastic for the decree of the time, for the day of revenge. He should perform (God\u2019s) will in all that his hand should tackle and in all that he controls, as he commanded. And all that happens to him he should welcome freely and be gratified by nothing except God\u2019s will. He should relish all the words of his mouth, wish for nothing that he has not commanded and be ever alert to the precept of God\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201325). The sect\u2019s submission toward the outside world was accompanied by an instruction to hate it\u2014their pacifism was conditional, the result of their belief in predestination. The members of the community, then, could not pursue legal remedies in the present era, and so they prayed: \u201cWhen distress is unleashed I shall praise him, just as I shall sing to him for his deliverance. I shall not repay anyone with an evil reward; with goodness I shall pursue man. For to God (belongs) the judgment of every living being, and it is he who pays man his wages. I shall not be jealous with a wicked spirit, and my soul shall not crave wealth by violence; I shall not be involved in any dispute with the men of the pit until the day of vengeance\u201d (1QS 10.17\u201319). The Qumran theology demands that its followers \u201creply with meekness to the haughty of spirit, and with a broken spirit to the men of the bending (of the law), those who point the finger and speak evil and are keen on riches\u201d (1QS 11.1\u20132).<br \/>\nThe much praised irenic tendencies of the Essenes were, then, little more than a fa\u00e7ade of peaceful coexistence that hides behind it a dualistic ideology of hatred and a belief in a predestined fate that promises the Essene elect world domination and the annihilation of the wicked on the fixed day.<br \/>\nIf we examine Paul\u2019s teachings regarding the proper Christian attitude toward the authorities, taking the position enunciated in the opening of Romans 13 as part of a broader discussion that begins in 12:9, we will find that Paul\u2019s view reflects the very same ideas as are presented in the Scrolls. As noted, the Essene doctrine of submission is rooted in their periodization of world history, and the resulting belief that one must abide by \u201cthe decree of the period\u201d (1QS 9.14). Paul too demands of his brethren (in the correct reading) \u201cserve the age (kairos).\u201d The similarity between Paul\u2019s position and that of the Manual of Discipline is clear from what follows. Where Paul says, \u201cRejoice in hope, be patient in suffering, persevere in prayer\u201d (Rom. 12:12), the Qumran text states, in much the same spirit, \u201cwhen distress is unleashed I shall praise him, just as I shall sing to him for his deliverance\u201d (1QS 10.18). Similarly, Paul exhorts his readers \u201cdo not be haughty but associate with the lowly\u201d (Rom. 12:16), echoed in the Manual of Discipline\u2019s vow: \u201cto instruct in the teaching those who complain and to reply with meekness to the haughty\u201d (1QS 11.1). The clearest parallel is between Paul\u2019s demands \u201cbless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them\u201d (Rom. 12:14) and \u201cdo not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all \u2026 never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, \u2018Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord\u2018\u201d (Rom. 12:16\u201319). While the Manual of Discipline states: \u201cI shall not repay anyone with an evil reward; with goodness I shall pursue man. For to God (belongs) the judgment of every living being, and it is he who pays man his wages\u201d (1QS 10.19). Indeed, there is a marked linguistic similarity between the Qumran \u201cwith goodness I shall pursue a man\u201d and Paul\u2019s demand: \u201cDo not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good\u201d (Rom. 12:21).<br \/>\nThere are other points of similarity between Paul\u2019s teachings and the Qumran doctrine of submission, even if precise parallels have not yet been found in the Scrolls. Note, for example, Paul\u2019s statement that \u201cif your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink; for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads\u201d (Rom. 12:20). As Krister Stendahl has noted, this statement\u2014and its surprising employment of Proverbs 25:21\u201322\u2014is closer to the teachings of Qumran than to Jesus\u2019 doctrine of love. Its meaning within the broader context of Romans is clear enough: do not repay evil with evil, rather \u201cwith goodness I shall pursue man.\u201d In so doing, you \u201cheap burning coals\u201d on the head of your enemy since vindictive behavior would reduce the severity of God\u2019s vengeance against the sinner. Though the Scrolls contain no explicit statement to this effect, the overall view fits well with the Qumran doctrine of apparent submission.<br \/>\nNote furthermore Paul\u2019s argument in favor of a conciliatory approach toward the enemies of the church: \u201cnever avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God\u201d (Rom. 12:19). This view is very similar to the qualified pacifism of the Scrolls, which is associated with an expectation of imminent vengeance. That is, the demand for \u201ceverlasting hatred of the men of the pit in clandestine spirit\u201d is linked with one being \u201centhusiastic for the decree and for its time, for the day of revenge\u201d (1QS 9.21\u201323). The Christian view, based on Jesus\u2019 teachings of love, prevents Paul from suggesting one is commanded to hate. He can, however, justify the prohibition against human vengeance as allowing a freer path for divine wrath, as God states, \u201cVengeance is mine, I will repay.\u201d The theological similarity to the Scrolls is, then, apparent, and so it comes as no surprise that Paul goes on to argue that there is no authority save God\u2019s, the very position Josephus attributes to the Essenes. We have since learned from the Scrolls that this position is anchored in the Essene doctrine of predestination, the basis for the Essene belief that one should leave to the men of the pit \u201cgoods and handmade items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed before someone domineering him\u201d (1QS 9.22). As noted, Paul makes similar arguments. True, Paul also argues that the authorities only punish the wicked\u2014a view that is not attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls but rather a Christian innovation that is also found in 1 Peter (2:13\u201317). Despite this difference, Paul argues that one ought to submit to the authorities not only because of God\u2019s wrath, but also because of \u201cconscience\u201d (Rom. 13:5), apparently alluding to his earlier statement: \u201cleave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, \u2018Vengeance is mine, I will repay\u2019&nbsp;\u201d (Rom. 12:19).<br \/>\nIn short, it appears that Paul\u2019s doctrine of the church\u2019s need to submit to authority is a continuation of his earlier statements concerning submission to enemies. Both these views have parallels in the Dead Sea Scrolls, where they form part of the same ideology. The question arises, then, whether the passage from Romans is based on an Essene source that reached Paul indirectly, through his Christian teachers. One way to approach this hypothesis is through an examination of the passages in which Paul deals with topics other than the doctrine of submission. And indeed, these are replete with distinctly Essene ideas. Thus Paul\u2019s statement: \u201chate what is evil; hold fast to what is good\u201d (Rom. 12:9), has a precise parallel in the Manual of Discipline: \u201ckeep oneself at a distance from all evil \u2026 become attached to all good works\u201d (1QS 1.5). Paul also urges his audience to \u201ccontribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers\u201d (Rom. 12:13), while the concern for communal needs caused the Essenes to share their wealth and exhibit their well-known hospitality. The practical and ideological solidarity of the Essenes is further echoed in Paul\u2019s exhortation to \u201clive in harmony with one another\u201d (Rom. 12:16).<br \/>\nThis passage in Romans, then, contains instructions for behavior within the community, framed within a broader discussion of the proper relationship between the community and the surrounding world. Both aspects of Paul\u2019s teachings have clear parallels in the Essene literature from Qumran. The question arises, then, whether Paul indirectly came upon an Essene source that addressed both the proper relationship between the Essenes and the sons of darkness who rule the world, and allusions to the love\/\/adoration that is proper for the Instructor within the community. Interestingly, this combination is found in the Rule of Discipline, which includes \u201cthe regulations for the Instructor by which he shall walk with every living being\u201d (1QS 9.12\u201321) and a concluding benediction (1QS 10.17\u201321, 26\u201311.2). Thus, the author of 1QS joins internal and external behavior by speaking of the need to have \u201ccompassionate love with the oppressed and to strengthen the hands of the dismayed, to teach understanding to those of stray spirit and to instruct in the teaching those who complain, to reply with meekness to the haughty of spirit, and with a broken spirit to the men of the bending (of the law), those who point the finger and speak evil, and are keen on riches\u201d (1QS 10.26\u201311.2). It is possible, then, that Paul had in his possession another Essene source that promoted love toward members of the community and submission toward the outside world. Note also that Roman 12:8\u201313:7 contains no distinctly Christian elements. That said, even if our hypothesis is correct there is no question that Paul had no direct knowledge of this source. For Paul, like 1 Peter, argues that the authorities only punish the wicked, a view that cannot be of Essene origin.<br \/>\nTo conclude: Paul\u2019s teachings concerning the need to submit to the authorities are linked to his earlier discussion of proper behavior toward one\u2019s enemies. The passage as a whole contains many Essene concepts, albeit in a subdued or muted form\u2014e.g., Paul cannot demand of his brethren to secretly hate their enemies. Still, the similarity to the Qumran ideology is marked. So much so that it is possible that Paul\u2019s teachings are drawn from an Essene source. The comparison between Romans and the Manual of Discipline sheds light on the conceptual background of Paul\u2019s teachings. Unfortunately, we are unable to resolve the thorny historical question of how these teachings entered the early church in the first place and became so widespread that Paul could include them in his writings to the distant church in Rome. Despite this failure, we were able to examine the fascinating evolution of sectarian Jewish ideas into Christian thought, where they would exercise a dramatic influence on the history of the Christian world.<\/p>\n<p>21.      The Isaiah Pesher and the Notion of Twelve Apostles in the Early Church<\/p>\n<p>I<\/p>\n<p>An important source for the study of the early church is the Qumran text that contains the pesher interpretation to Isaiah 54:11\u201312. The text, 4QpIsad (= 4Q164), was first published by Allegro, and has been discussed by Yadin, but its surprising ramifications for intellectual origins of the Christian institute of twelve apostles have yet to be recognized. Here are the verses from Isaiah, followed by the Qumran passage, with those of Yadin\u2019s emendations that should be considered certain.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cO afflicted one, storm-tossed, and not comforted, I am about to set your stones in eye-paint, and lay your foundations with sapphires. I will make your pinnacles of rubies, your gates of jewels, and all your wall of precious stones\u201d (Isa. 54:11\u201312).<\/p>\n<p>[\u201cI am about to set your stones in eye-paint\u201d]<br \/>\n1.      [Its interpretation is that he will make] all Israel like eye-paint around the eye. \u201cAnd lay your foundations with sapphires.\u201d [Its interpretation:]<br \/>\n2.      They founded the council of the Community, [the] priests and the peo[ple \u2026]<br \/>\n3.      the assembly of his elect, like a sapphire stone in the midst of stones. [\u201cI will make]<br \/>\n4.      your pinnacles [of rubies].\u201d Its interpretation concerns the twelve [\u2026]<br \/>\n5.      illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim [\u2026]<br \/>\n6.      any from among them missing, like the sun in all its light. \u201cAnd a[ll] your wall of precious stones.\u201d<br \/>\n7.      Its interpretation concerns the chiefs of the tribes of Israel [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>Yadin rightly argues that the Pesher assumes that the eschatological Jerusalem described by Isaiah symbolizes God\u2019s elect, that is, the Qumran community itself. This interpretation is virtually certain. The building imagery is one of the most common symbols in the Qumran literature: the Community frequently likens itself to a building, to the temple, or to a city, a tendency that fits well with the interpretation of Isaiah\u2019s prophecy concerning Jerusalem in the end of days as referring to the Community itself. Not all of the text survived and, as a result, some of the details of the Qumran interpretation are not clear. Nonetheless, it is evident that the Qumran author understood the different stones of Isaiah\u2019s Jerusalem as symbols for the institution or institutions of the Community, either in the present or the future. These were made up of twelve individuals, a number that is cited explicitly in line 4 and again alluded to in line 5, which mentions the Urim and the Thummim, the twelve precious stones on the priestly breastplate, each bearing the name of one of the tribes (Exod. 28:17\u201321). This imagery is undoubtedly linked to the third allusion to the number twelve (lines 6\u20137), where the precious stones in Isaiah\u2019s \u201cI will make \u2026 all your wall of precious stones\u201d are interpreted as a reference to \u201cthe chiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d<br \/>\nThus, while Isaiah does not mention the number twelve in the relevant verses, the Qumran author connects the Jerusalem stones in the prophet\u2019s eschatological vision with the twelve stones of the priestly breastplate. The source for this interpretation is found in another prophecy concerning Jerusalem in the end of days, Ezekiel\u2019s, which our author employed as a bridge between Isaiah and the Urim and Thummim. For Ezekiel speaks of twelve gates in the eschatological Jerusalem, \u201cthe gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel\u201d (Ezek. 48:31)\u2014just like the stones of the breastplate. The Qumran author seems to have located the connection between the two prophetic visions\u2014Isaiah\u2019s and Ezekiel\u2019s and from them to the stones of the breastplate, in Isaiah 54:12: \u201cI will make \u2026 your gates of jewels.\u201d Though the interpretation of this phrase is not attested, it appears the author identifies Ezekiel\u2019s twelve gates bearing the names of the tribes, with the gates Isaiah claims will be made of jewels\u2014and thus the connection with the stones of the breastplate. Since this part of Isaiah\u2019s prophecy plays a crucial role in the overall interpretation, and since the Qumran interpreters interpreted the biblical verses in their entirety, it stands to reason that the interpretation of \u201cyour gates of jewels\u201d was located in a part of the scroll that is no longer extant. The only likely place where such matters could be alluded to comes at the end of line 4, which opens with the citation of \u201cI will make your pinnacles of rubies,\u201d while line 6 interprets the end of the biblical verse, \u201cand all your wall of precious stones.\u201d In light of this, I suggest, the passage should be reconstructed as follows: \u201c[\u2018I will make] your pinnacles [of rubies].\u2019 Its interpretation concerns the twelve [jewels that] illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim,\u201d etc. The advantage of this reconstruction is that it assumes that, like all other pesher interpretations, our passage does not skip over any of the interpreted verses.<br \/>\nThe interpretive approach of the passage is clear enough, at least in broad strokes. It is much more difficult to determine what institution or institutions the author has in mind when he speaks of \u201cthe twelve,\u201d invokes the stones of the breastplate, and links Isaiah\u2019s \u201cgates of jewels\u201d with the \u201cchiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d The other Dead Sea Scrolls suggest two possible answers, since they know of two groups that consist of twelve members. The first is mentioned in the Manual of Discipline: \u201cIn the Community council (there shall be) twelve men and three priests, perfect in everything that has been revealed from all the law\u201d (1QS 8.1\u20132). Interestingly, we find that both the Manual of Discipline and Pesher Isaiah employ similar terminology: both speak of \u201cthe Community council\u201d (the pesher reads: \u201cthey founded the council of the Community\u201d), of priests, and of twelve-person institutions. Moreover, immediately after mentioning the twelve people, the Manual of Discipline employs building imagery very similar to that found in the pesher. Thus we find the Community likened to \u201ca holy house for Israel and the foundation of the holy of holies for Aaron\u201d (1QS 8.5\u20136), and similarly to \u201cthe tested rampart, the precious cornerstone whose foundations do not shake or tremble from their place\u201d (1QS 8.7\u20138). If we assume that the twelve people of the Manual of Discipline are the institution referred to in Pesher Isaiah, we may propose the following reconstruction of lines 1\u20135:<\/p>\n<p>1.      [Its interpretation is that he will make] all Israel like eye-paint around the eye. \u201cAnd lay your foundations with sapphires.\u201d [Its interpretation:]<br \/>\n2.      They founded the council of the Community, [the] priests and the peo[ple within]<br \/>\n3.      the assembly of his elect, like a sapphire stone in the midst of stones. [\u201cI will make]<br \/>\n4.      your pinnacles [of rubies].\u201d Its interpretation concerns the twelve [jewels that]<br \/>\n5.      illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim.<\/p>\n<p>According to this proposed reconstruction, eschatological Jerusalem is the Qumran community, \u201cthe council of the Community\u201d or \u201cthe assembly of his elect\u201d; the prophetic phrase \u201cI am about to \u2026 lay your foundations in sapphires\u201d means that the priests and the people\u2014i.e., the \u201ctwelve men and three priests\u201d that the Manual of Discipline characterizes as \u201cthe council of the Community\u201d\u2014are \u201clike a sapphire stone in the midst of stones,\u201d that is, the foundation upon which the rest of the Qumran community rests. According to my reconstruction, these twelve people are alluded to by Isaiah\u2019s \u201cI will make your pinnacles of rubies, your gates of jewels, and all your wall of precious stones,\u201d all analogues to the twelve stones of the priestly breastplate that bear the names of the tribes. The institution of the twelve in the Manual of Discipline corresponds, then, to the \u201cchiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d<br \/>\nHowever, it is clear that this reconstruction is hypothetical and cannot be definitively proven. For example, the Qumran writings do not contain the phrase \u201cthe priests and the people,\u201d and the suggestion that the \u201cpeople\u201d refers to the twelve individuals in the council of the Community is doubtful. Finally, most scholars suggest that the Manual of Discipline\u2019s \u201ctwelve men and three priests\u201d refers to a group of fifteen, rather than twelve of whom three are priests\u2014and this view seems persuasive. Pesher Isaiah three times alludes to an institution (or to institutions) that contain only twelve.<br \/>\nAnother major difficulty in identifying the institution of the twelve in Pesher Isaiah with the twelve mentioned in the Manual of Discipline has to do with the fact that these twelve individuals are not mentioned anywhere else in the Qumran literature. Does this mean that the institution in question played a minor role in the Qumran community? If we could establish that Pesher Isaiah is alluding to this group, its importance would rise dramatically. But even the Manual of Discipline does not fully clarify the role and function of the twelve. A number of scholars believe that the twelve laymen and three priests constitute some sort of internal committee within the broader community, but it is also possible that the Manual of Discipline is speaking of the \u201ccouncil of the Community\u201d itself, establishing a minimum quorum of twelve lay members and three priests. Despite these difficulties, it is possible that Pesher Isaiah refers to the twelve individuals from the Manual of Discipline, especially in light of the surprising parallels (discussed more fully below) with the twelve apostles. The apostles, after all, started out as Jesus\u2019 inner circle, but later\u2014following his death\u2014became the executive committee that oversaw the activities of the Jerusalem church.<br \/>\nIt should be noted that there is another Qumran institution that consists of twelve individuals, and the Pesher may be referring to it. In the War Scroll we find: \u201cThey shall arrange the chiefs of the priests behind the High Priest and his second (in rank), twelve chiefs to serve in perpetuity before God\u201d (1QM 2.1\u20132), and Yadin holds that this is the institution alluded to in Pesher Isaiah. As a result, he reconstructs the passage as follows:<\/p>\n<p>[\u201cI am about to set your stones in eye-paint\u201d]<br \/>\n1.      [Its interpretation is that he will make] all Israel like eye-paint around the eye. \u201cAnd lay your foundations with sapphires.\u201d [Its interpretation:]<br \/>\n2.      They founded the council of the Community, [among the] priests: and the [council is]<br \/>\n3.      the assembly of his elect, like a sapphire stone in the midst of stones. [\u201cI will make]<br \/>\n4.      your pinnacles [of rubies].\u201d Its interpretation concerns the twelve [priests that?]<br \/>\n5.      illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim [and no stones of]<br \/>\n6.      any from among them missing, like the sun in all its light. \u201cAnd a[ll] your wall of precious stones.\u201d<br \/>\n7.      Its interpretation concerns the chiefs of the tribes of Israel [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>According to this reconstruction, the sapphires of Isaiah 54:11 are interpreted as the priests that are the foundations of the Community. It is unclear whether these priests, mentioned in line 2, are the same as the twelve priests Yadin provides in line 4. Be all that as it may, it is evident that the twelve priests in question cannot be identical with the twelve chiefs of the tribes of Israel adduced in line 7 as a midrashic gloss of Isaiah\u2019s \u201call your wall of precious stones.\u201d The advantage of Yadin\u2019s reconstruction lies in the fact that all of the prophet\u2019s building symbols need not be construed as a reference to a single institution. The advantage of my reconstruction\u2014to which we will return presently\u2014is that the symbols in question do in fact refer to one institution in the New Testament: the institution of the twelve apostles.<br \/>\nYadin\u2019s decision to supply the word \u201cpriests\u201d at the end of line 4 is based, to be sure, on the overall importance of the priesthood in the Qumran literature, as well as the explicit reference to priests in line 2. No less important, however, are the twelve priests in the War Scroll, and the fact that there are some parallels in other scrolls to the end of our lines 5\u20136\u2014all of which refer to priests. Yadin rightly notes that the phrase \u201cilluminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim\u201d in line 5 is similar to the words of another scroll, where we read: \u201cAnd about Levi he says \u2018Give to Levi your Thummim and your Urim\u2019 (Deut. 33:8)\u201d (4Q175 [= 4QTestimonia] 14). Similarly with the phrase \u201cthe sun in all its light,\u201d which has near parallels in the Qumran scrolls dealing with the priesthood and in cognate literature.<br \/>\nAccording to Yadin\u2019s reconstruction, Pesher Isaiah refers to two distinct institutions, each of which consists of twelve individuals: the twelve priests of line 4, and the twelve chiefs of the tribes of Israel at line 7. And indeed we find these two institutions mentioned side by side in the War Scroll. Alongside them this text also mentions \u201cthe chiefs of the Levites to serve always, twelve, one per tribe\u201d (1QM 2.2\u20133). The Qumran eschatology posits, then, a set of individuals charged with each of the tribes: a priest, a member of the Levite tribe, and the tribe\u2019s chief. This tribal structure has no parallel in the texts describing the non-eschatological Qumran community, which knows the number twelve only in the context of the individuals in the council of the Community. It is true that Pesher Isaiah interprets the words of the prophet as though they are aimed at the end of days, but the Pesher itself refers to the fact that \u201cthey founded the council of the Community\u201d in past tense, so that at least this event refers to the present, non-eschatological reality. Furthermore, it should be emphasized that the twelve priests\u2014just like the twelve individuals in the Manual of Discipline\u2014are mentioned but once in the Scrolls published thus far, so it is difficult to ascertain the precise organizational context of the fragmentary pesher.<\/p>\n<p>II<\/p>\n<p>It is a pity that we cannot determine the precise nature of the institution alluded to in Pesher Isaiah. Were this text preserved in its entirety, it would probably provide us with clear information regarding the origins of the early Christian institution of the twelve apostles. For we find striking parallels between the New Testament and the pre-Christian Qumran writings with regard to the religious and conceptual underpinnings of the twelve apostles, the inner circle of Jesus. Consider Revelation 21:12\u201314 which, like Pesher Isaiah, describes eschatological Jerusalem. According to John of Patmos,<\/p>\n<p>It has a great, high wall with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates are inscribed the names of the twelve tribes of the Israelites; on the east three gates, on the north three gates, on the south three gates, and on the west three gates. And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.<\/p>\n<p>It is evident that the author bases himself first and foremost on Ezekiel 48:31\u201334, interpreting \u201cthe gates of the city being named after the tribes of Israel\u201d (Ezek. 48:31) as if the names of the tribes are inscribed on each of the twelve gates. Revelation then goes on to characterize the gates as follows: \u201cAnd the twelve gates are twelve pearls, each of the gates is a single pearl, and the street of the city is pure gold, transparent as glass\u201d (Rev. 21:21). Scholars have rightly recognized that The Apocalypse of John here echoes the words of Isaiah 54:12. The similarity to this verse, or, more precisely, to the Qumran Pesher\u2019s interpretation of this verse, becomes more pronounced once we consider John of Patmos\u2019 description of the twelve foundation stones of eschatological Jerusalem. Isaiah says only \u201cI am about to lay your foundations (or: your foundations are) with sapphires,\u201d while Revelation provides a more detailed account, suggesting that the city has twelve foundations, which bear the names of the twelve apostles of the lamb (21:14). These foundations symbolically indicate that the Christian community is founded upon the twelve apostles, corresponding to the twelve tribes of Israel, whose names are engraved on the twelve gates. As noted, our Pesher passage refers to the number twelve three times (lines 4, 5, and 7). In the third of these, Isaiah\u2019s \u201cprecious stones\u201d are interpreted as \u201cthe chiefs of the tribes of Israel,\u201d corresponding to the names of the tribes of Israel written (according to Revelation) on the twelve gates of Jerusalem. The twelve of line 4 \u201cilluminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim,\u201d just as The Apocalypse of John states that \u201cthe foundations of the wall of the city are adorned with every jewel\u201d and then goes on to list, in a different order, the twelve precious stones of the priestly breastplate (Rev. 21:19\u201320)! The similarity between Pesher Isaiah and Revelation 21 is threefold: both interpret eschatological Jerusalem and its physical components as symbols of their respective communities; both juxtapose ideas drawn from the same prima facie unrelated biblical sources (Isaiah 54:11\u201312, Ezekiel 48:31\u201334, and Exodus 28:17\u201321); and both employ the same unusual symbols.<br \/>\nIt is true that stone symbolism was employed throughout the Jewish world, but taken together, the significant parallels between Pesher Isaiah and The Apocalypse of John suggest a substantive and theological link between the texts. We have already noted that the Qumran community typically understands itself in terms of a structure\u2014the Temple or a house. We may assume, then, that the images of eschatological Jerusalem in The Apocalypse of John\u2014so close to the imagery to Pesher Isaiah\u2014derive from the Qumran circles. Particularly, in light of the fact that we have proven elsewhere that another similar New Testament image (1 Peter 2:5\u20136) has a genuine literary connection to the Qumran writings. Still, the question remains whether the literary similarity is the result of a later, secondary influence exercised near the time the Book of Revelation was composed, under Domitian, or perhaps the result of a Christian tradition influenced by Qumran at the very beginning of Christianity. I believe the answer to this question lies in the fact that most of the points of contact relate to issues that involve the twelve apostles. It will be necessary to examine the evidence of the other books of the New Testament in comparison both with Revelation and with the Qumran sources, thus establishing that the similarity exists in all strata of the early Christian texts, from Jesus to the composition of The Apocalypse of John. Once this has been done, we will see that in establishing the institution of the twelve apostles, Jesus was influenced by the Qumran community, and that The Apocalypse of John here preserves an apostolic tradition that dates back to the beginning of Christianity. We will begin our survey with the later sources, moving backward toward the earlier, in other words, from Revelation to Jesus himself.<\/p>\n<p>III<\/p>\n<p>The Book of Revelation is not the only source that identifies the apostles as the foundation of the early church. In Ephesians we find: \u201cSo then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. In him the whole structure is joined together and grown into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built together in the spirit into a dwelling place for God\u201d (Eph.2:19\u201322). Ephesians here combines the symbolism of the city with the symbolism of the Temple, a tendency attested both in the Scrolls and elsewhere in the New Testament. As in Revelation, the community\u2019s structure rests on the apostles, and it appears the same traditions underlie Ephesians and Revelation. Also of note is Paul\u2019s description of his visit to the Jerusalem Church where he meets \u201cJames and Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars\u201d (Gal. 2:9). This terminology is no doubt taken from the Jerusalem Church of the day, as it is known to Clement of Rome at the end of the first century, as we see from his Epistle to the Corinthians, which states: \u201cThrough envy and jealousy, the greatest and most righteous pillars [of the Church] have been persecuted and put to death. Let us set before our eyes the illustrious apostles\u201d (5:2\u20135); Peter and Paul are mentioned shortly after. To be sure, the pillar served as a symbol for national leaders in broader Jewish circles as well, but as a designation of the head of the Jerusalem Church it is undoubtedly tied to the highly developed building symbolism employed both by the church and the Qumran community. Another relevant source comes from Revelation 3:12: \u201cIf you conquer, I will make you a pillar in the temple of my God; you will never go out of it. I will write on you the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem that comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name.\u201d In this verse, the pillar image is tied to the Temple and to eschatological Jerusalem, the symbol of the community in both Pesher Isaiah and in Revelation 21. Just as Revelation 21:14 has the names of the apostles on the twelve foundation stones of the city, here we find the symbolic pillar adorned with names. The pillar, then, is part of Revelation\u2019s foundation stone symbolism, and it stands to reason that the title \u2018pillars\u2019 was not a mere honorific the Jerusalem Church gave its three leaders, but rather part of a broader image of the building imagery\u2014with its various architectonic components\u2014used for the church and its institutions.<br \/>\nIt appears, then, that the view of the twelve foundations, i.e. the twelve apostles, which is explicit in Revelation 21 and alluded to in Ephesians 2:20, was part of the Jerusalem Church\u2019s ideology from the outset. The question of the ultimate origin of this idea, however, remains open. One possibility is that it developed within the Jerusalem Church under the influence of the Qumran community, for we have seen that very similar ideas appear in Pesher Isaiah. Another possibility is that Jesus himself established the twelve apostles, paralleling the similar Qumran institution, thus allowing the originally Dead Sea symbolism to be preserved in the early Christian community.<br \/>\nWe begin our analysis with a logion preserved in Matthew, where Jesus addresses Peter, saying: \u201cAnd I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it\u201d (Matt. 16:18). A number of scholars have noted the similarity between this statement and ones like it in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The closest parallel is Hodayot 14.26\u201336, which addressed God as follows: \u201cfor you place the foundation upon rock, and beams to the correct size, and a true plumb line to stretch out, tested stones to build a fortress which will not shake. All who enter there will not stagger, for a foreigner will not penetrate it; its gates are armored doors which do not permit entry, with unbreakable strong bars.\u201d During the eschatological wars against evil the hero \u201cwill break open the encirclement \u2026 into an endless broad place. (He will open) the everlasting gates [= the gates of Hell] to take out weapons of war\u201d; however, the members of the Community will remain in their fortress and he will protect them even in this hour of ultimate distress.<br \/>\nThe similarity between Jesus\u2019 words to Peter and Hodayot 14 is marked and startling. The key difference is, of course, the identity of the rock upon which the community is founded: in the Qumran text it is God, while Jesus assigns this role to Peter, much as the midrashic text states that God founded his work on a rock, i.e., Abraham. The apostle Peter is, then, the rock upon which the church is established, much as The Apocalypse of John and Ephesians identify the twelve apostles with the foundation stones of the city of God, that is, the church. If we could establish with certainty that Matthew 16:18 is one of Jesus\u2019 authentic sayings, we could cite it as evidence that Jesus described at least one of the apostles in the imagery of a church founded on apostles. It seems, however, that the saying\u2014at least in the form preserved by Matthew\u2014is not authentic, and may have been reworked so as to emphasize Peter\u2019s importance in the post-Jesus Jerusalem Church. Indeed, there is no indication in the authentic Jesus sayings that he intended to establish an independent church. The Greek word translated as \u201cchurch\u201d in the NRSV appears only once more in the synoptic gospels, again in a Matthew saying (18:17) that is rightly considered inauthentic. Nonetheless, it is significant that the entire passage (Matthew 16:17\u201319) is one of the most \u201cHebrew\u201d in the gospels in terms of its language and its expressions. The Hebrew original was undoubtedly close to the rabbinic panegyrics, which employ an elevated, nearly poetic language. The first sentence certainly appears authentic. It is possible, then, that Jesus\u2019 praise of Peter is the source of the passage as a whole, though its present form is the result of later reworking that focused on the verse in question (Matthew 16:18). Jesus\u2019 description of Peter as the rock upon which the church will be founded is not, then, definitive proof that Jesus held that his community would be based on twelve apostles. For in any case, the statement can be explicated in light of the church-building analogy, where the building includes a foundation and rocks, the same imagery that underlies the eschatological vision of Jerusalem in Revelation and in Pesher Isaiah.<br \/>\nOur question, then, is whether there is another instance in which Jesus employs the building imagery. During his final visit to Jerusalem, Jesus famously prophesied that the Temple would be destroyed and the corrupt national leadership replaced by better heirs (Mark 12:1\u201312; Matthew 21:33\u201346; Luke 20:9\u201319). Drawing on Isaiah 5, Jesus likens Israel to a vineyard and tells of the criminal tenants whom the owner will eventually destroy, leaving the vineyard to new tenants. Here Jesus adds: \u201cHave you never read in the scriptures: \u2018The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone\u2018?\u201d (Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17). To whom is Jesus alluding when he cites Psalm 118:22? In Acts (4:11) and 1 Peter (2:7), this verse is interpreted as a reference to Jesus. As a result we find a widespread belief that Jesus alluded to himself as the rejected stone that would become the cornerstone. Clearly, the parable about the tenants who kill the only son of the vineyard\u2019s owner prefigures Jesus\u2019 own expected death at the hands of the corrupt national leadership. However, it is not clear that Jesus cited Psalm 118 to suggest that he was going to be rejected\u2014that is, tried and executed\u2014but after his death would become a cornerstone of a great movement or of all Israel. Ephesians 2:20 certainly identifies Jesus as the cornerstone of the symbolic building founded on the priests and the apostles, a view that may have been influenced by a Christological interpretation of the Psalm verse in question. The parable of the vineyard, however, points to another possibility. Jesus concludes the parable with the assertion that the owner of the vineyard \u201cwill put those wretches to a miserable death, and lease the vineyard to other tenants,\u201d then turning to his audience asks if they have not read in Scriptures that \u201cThe stone that the builders rejected has become a cornerstone.\u201d It appears, then, that the stone stands for those who, according to Jesus, will receive the vineyard (Israel) after the destruction of the bad tenants. The rejected stone will become the cornerstone of the House of Israel. Those who are rejected are the poor, the meek, the poor in spirit and the persecuted, whom Jesus promises the Kingdom of Heaven. That is, those that are last will become first. This interpretation fits not only the context of the parable, but also Jesus\u2019 overall approach, for he found similar views\u2014though based in a more radical social ideology\u2014within the Scrolls. It will come as no surprise if it can eventually be shown that the Qumran community, which frequently employed building symbolism to describe themselves, interpreted \u201cthe stone that the builders rejected has become a cornerstone\u201d as referring to themselves. A similar view appears in the parable of the trees in Hodayot 16.8\u201315: At the present time, the community is \u201cnot considered, nor its sealed mystery known\u201d but in future days it will rise up to its highest apex. We are faced with two possible interpretations: my view, that Jesus cites \u201ca stone that the builders rejected\u201d as a sign of the glorious future that awaits the poor and downtrodden, and the traditional view that Jesus adduces the verse in reference to himself as a cornerstone. In either case, the citation of the verse demonstrates that Jesus too employed building symbolism. Already Jesus\u2019 teacher, John the Baptist, employed his own building symbolism: \u201cDo not presume to say to yourselves, \u2018We have Abraham as our ancestor\u2018; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham\u201d (Matt. 3:9; Luke 3:8).<br \/>\nWe have traced the building symbolism from The Apocalypse of John to the words of John the Baptist, concluding that this imagery was apparently not foreign to Jesus. We further established that the idea that the twelve apostles are the foundation stones of the church was well known among the early followers of Jesus, dating at the latest to the years immediately following his death. If Jesus\u2019 saying that Peter is the rock upon which the church is to be built is authentic, or at least contains an authentic kernel, then Jesus employed a nearly identical motif to describe the most important of his apostles. The material discussed thus far suggests that the similarity between the eschatological Jerusalem visions of Revelation and Pesher Isaiah (by no means limited to the symbolism of the twelve foundation stones) is not the result of a secondary influence exerted by the Qumran community on the Jerusalem church. It is far more likely that Jesus established the institution of the twelve apostles, in part due to the influence of Qumran ideology and institutions. Significant support for this view comes from another of Jesus\u2019 sayings, a saying upon which Pesher Isaiah casts new light. Jesus promises his twelve apostles that in the end of days, \u201cwhen the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel\u201d (Matt. 19:28; Luke 22:30). Most scholars consider this an authentic saying of Jesus, since the promise that the twelve apostles will judge the twelve tribes in the end of days highlights the Jewish national element in Jesus\u2019 religious worldview. This promise is usually understood as a reference to the apostles ruling over the tribes, that is, becoming the chiefs of the tribes of Israel. The appearance of the phrase \u201cthe chiefs of the tribes of Israel\u201d in Pesher Isaiah, a text that contains numerous motifs that appear in relation to the institution of the twelve apostles, only strengthens this interpretation. That said, if we examine Jesus\u2019 saying as it appears in Matthew\u2014and this seems to be the more original form\u2014we find that the twelve apostles will sit on their thrones in judgment of the tribes while the Son of Man is likewise seated on his throne. Now, both the gospels and 1 Enoch clearly indicate that the Son of Man sits on his throne when judging mankind. It would appear, then, that Jesus is not only promising his apostles that in the end of days they will be the chiefs of the tribes of Israel, but that they will serve as the tribes\u2019 judges in the final judgment. Where does Jesus come upon such an idea? Pesher Isaiah suggests that it was one of the core ideas of the institution of the twelve. Revelation (21:12) states that the names of the twelve tribes of Israel are written on the twelve gates of eschatological Jerusalem, while the twelve foundation stones of the cities bear the names of the twelve apostles (21:14). These foundation stones, moreover, are none other than the precious stones of the priestly breastplate, the Urim and the Thummim (21:19\u201320). The identification of the breastplate stones with the stones of eschatological Jerusalem is also attested in Pesher Isaiah: \u201cIts interpretation concerns the twelve [\u2026] illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim.\u201d As noted, we also find here mention of the \u201cchiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d If the twelve chiefs are symbolized by the precious stones of the breastplate\u2014which bear the names of each tribe and serve in rendering judgment\u2014it follows that there is a link between the chiefs and the function of judgment. The symbolism of The Apocalypse of John is fundamentally identical with that of Pesher Isaiah, and helps clarify why Jesus would assert that the twelve apostles will judge the tribes of Israel in the end of days.<br \/>\nIf we compare the two logia of Jesus with the words of Revelation and of Pesher Isaiah, we find that Jesus\u2019 description is rather thin where the other sources are rich in details. The logion describing Peter as the rock upon which the church will be built belongs to the symbolism of the twelve foundation stones of the community, while the assertion that the twelve apostles will judge the tribes of Israel is best understood in light of the identification of the twelve foundation stones with the Urim and Thummim. Even if the saying concerning Peter has not been reached in its original form, it is nonetheless clear that the connection between the two sayings of Jesus and the symbolism of Revelation and Pesher Isaiah sheds light on the figure and teachings of Jesus. It stands to reason that if the Qumran texts\u2014and not only Revelation\u2014contain a full-fledged ideology surrounding the institution of the twelve, the roots of this institution lie in the pre-Christian Dead Sea community, whose influence on the early church is well established.<\/p>\n<p>IV<\/p>\n<p>Most scholars today argue rightly that Jesus himself established the institution of the twelve apostles. The most compelling proof for this view is that following the death of Jesus, when Judah Iscariot, who was one of the twelve apostles, betrayed his master and apparently died (Acts 1:15\u201326), another apostle was added to complete the number twelve. This suggests that already with Jesus\u2019 establishment of the institution the number of apostles was set at twelve. The centrality of the number is further reflected in the fact that there is some variation in the names of apostles in different New Testament lists, but they always number twelve.<br \/>\nThe gospels preserve the echo of a tradition that at first Jesus selected five students, a tradition preserved in the Babylonian Talmud as well (Sanhedrin 43a). As with the apostles, the number is uniformly fixed, though here it is five, even with the names changed. It appears that the number is not random, as indicated by the rabbinic sources: \u201cRabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai had five disciples\u201d (m. Avot 2.8); the number of disciples Rabbi Aqiva had during the years of persecution was similarly five; the Passover Haggadah lists five sages who were seated in Bene Berak; and the rabbinic sources further speak of a group of five sages. We find, then, that when Jesus selected five disciples he was following an approach he received from the world of the sages; in expanding the institution to twelve apostles he acted under the influence of (or in competition with) the Essenes, as evidenced by the marked similarity in the ideologies of the twelve in the New Testament and Pesher Isaiah.<br \/>\nIt remains to be seen whether Jesus was influenced by the Essene worldview directly, or through the mediation of John the Baptist\u2019s group, which was close to but not part of the Essenes. The latter possibility is quite plausible. Not only did Jesus and John know each other personally and their disciples maintain ties, but though evidence concerning John the Baptist and his followers is meager, it may suggest that Jesus established the institution of the twelve apostles under the influence of John the Baptist\u2019s disciples. We saw above that the ideology of the twelve is based on both the number itself and on the building imagery, so it is worth repeating that both these elements appear in the words of John the Baptist: \u201cDo not presume to say to yourselves, \u2018We have Abraham as our ancestor\u2019; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham\u201d (Matt. 3:9; Luke 3:8). The Baptist\u2014whose worldview was remarkable close to that of the Qumran community\u2014here provides a colorful and original interpretation of the imagery of building stones as a foundation for God\u2019s elect community. As for the number twelve, Acts notes there were twelve disciples baptized in the baptism of repentance by John (19:1\u20137). Since John the Baptist employed the building imagery and his disciples attributed some significance to the number twelve, it stands to reason that Jesus\u2019 decision to establish twelve apostles was influenced by the Baptist and his circle, rather than by the Essenes, directly.<br \/>\nWe noted at the outset of our study that it is difficult to determine the precise nature and identity of the institution (or institutions) to which Pesher Isaiah refers. Were we to solve that problem we would establish the identity of the Essene institution that served as the model (whether directly or indirectly) for the Christian institution of the twelve apostles. Pesher Isaiah might then shed light not only on the ideological background of the twelve apostles, but on the organizational function of this Essene institution, and perhaps on the administrative role of the Christian apostleship. Unfortunately, we cannot even identify the relevant institution in Pesher Isaiah\u2014largely due to the poor physical condition of the scroll. Yadin\u2019s reconstruction of the text suggests we are dealing with three distinct institutions: the Qumran priesthood as a whole (lines 2\u20133), the twelve priests mentioned in the War Scroll (lines 4\u20136) and the twelve chiefs of the tribes of Israel (line 7). If we accept this reconstruction and the ensuing conclusions, it follows that the Christian institution of the twelve apostles emerged out of a merger of two eschatological Qumran institutions, that is, the twelve priests and the twelve chiefs of the tribes of Israel. We may also assume that one of the ideas that the Dead Sea community associated with its priests was transferred to the apostles, namely, that they function as a foundation stone of sorts for the community as a whole. In other words, the twelve apostles took on the priestly ideology of Qumran\u2014a plausible suggestion since the early church never assigned a particular role to its priestly members. If so, there exists a correlation between the institution and the ideology of the twelve apostles, on the one hand, and the messianic belief expressed in Hebrews. For here too we find that the belief in a messiah was transferred from Aaron to Jesus, who is traditionally seen as coming from the house of David. In this manner, the Qumran belief in dual messiahs, one priestly, the other lay, is transformed in Hebrews to the belief in a single messianic figure. The possibility exists, then, that the Christian apostleship is the single product of different Qumran institutions and different ideological organizations.<br \/>\nIt should be recalled, however, that the symbolism of Pesher Isaiah\u2014where the number twelve is stated explicitly once (line 4) and alluded to twice more (lines 5 and 7)\u2014is applied in the New Testament (and in The Apocalypse of John in particular) to a single institution, the apostleship. Perhaps, then, Pesher Isaiah too deals with a single Qumran institution, one made up of twelve individuals that served as a model for Jesus when he selected the twelve apostles from among his disciples. It may also be true that this institution is identical with the twelve individuals mentioned in 1QS 8.1, alongside the three priests. As noted, however, there is no way to definitively answer this important question, as the surviving copy of Pesher Isaiah is badly damaged.<br \/>\nThe chart on page 323 summarizes the main parallels between the New Testament\u2019s statements concerning the twelve apostles, and those of Pesher Isaiah. As the chart demonstrates, the fullest parallels are between Pesher Isaiah and Revelation, though the other parallels indicate the symbolism of the twelve apostles was present in sources that predate the composition of the Book of Revelation. And while there are many scholars who doubt the authenticity of Jesus\u2019 saying concerning Peter the rock, there are many others who rightly defend the authenticity of Jesus\u2019 assertion that the apostles will judge the tribes of Israel. Clearly, then, the sophisticated and sublime apostle symbolism preserved in the Book of Revelation found its way from the Essene world into the Jesus community at the time he established the institution of the twelve apostles. That the symbolism of the twelve found in the writings of a Jewish sect that predates the church then reappears in full force in the Apocalypse of John, indicates that the apostles themselves\u2014who knew, of course, of the ideological import of the Essene institution Jesus used as a model\u2014preserved this ideology, which no doubt colored their understanding of their own lofty role both in the divine world and in the Jerusalem church. However, the view of the apostles was occasionally frowned upon by their master, Jesus. Thus the gospels record that two of the apostles, James and John the sons of Zebedee (or perhaps their mother), ask Jesus to promise that in the end of days one will be seated to his right and the other to his left (Matthew 20:20\u201328; Mark 10:35\u201345). But Jesus answers: \u201cto sit at my right hand and at my left, that is not mine to grant.\u201d Jesus then goes on to say: \u201cYou know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant\u201d (Matthew 20:25\u201326; Mark 10:41\u201345; Luke 22:24\u201327). Jesus\u2019 words to the sons of Zebedee echo his other statement (Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:29\u201330) that the twelve apostles will sit on twelve thrones and judge the tribes of Israel. However, there is a tension between Jesus\u2019 promise to the apostles and his words to the sons of Zebedee, since the latter suggest that it is not Jesus but God who determines the seating at the eschatological event. According to one saying, then, Jesus accepted the originally Essene view that the \u201ctwelve\u201d will \u201cilluminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim\u201d when they sit in judgment as the \u201cchiefs of the tribes of Israel.\u201d According to the second, however, this position is rejected. It seems to me that this contradiction does not mean we should reject either of the two statements. They are rather the product of the coincidentia oppositorum of humility, on the one hand, and supreme self-awareness, on the other, that characterize the person and the gospel of Jesus. As for this specific issue, it is worth noting that the tension between the two sayings suggests that the lofty eschatological position vouchsafed the members of this institution was already an integral part of the institution when Jesus established it in his own community. This allowed him to assert the eschatological promises to the apostles at one point, and to criticize them at another.<\/p>\n<p>Pesher Isaiah<br \/>\nRevelation<br \/>\nOther parallels<br \/>\n1. New Jerusalem<br \/>\n1. New Jerusalem (chapter 21).<br \/>\nThe city (Ephesians 2:19)<br \/>\n2. (a) \u201cAnd lay your foundations with sapphires.\u201d [Its interpretation:] They founded the council of the Community, [the] priests and the peo[ple \u2026] the assembly of his elect, like a sapphire stone in the midst of stones, [\u201cI will make] your pinnacles [of rubies].\u201d Its interpretation concerns the twelve<br \/>\n2. The twelve foundation stones, upon which are the names of the twelve apostles (21:14).<br \/>\n2. The apostles as foundation (Ephesians 2:20). The church is founded on Peter, the rock (Matthew 16:18)<br \/>\n3.\u2026 illuminate with the judgment of the Urim and the Thummim [\u2026]<br \/>\n3. The foundations stones and the stones of the Urim and Thummim (21:19\u201320)<br \/>\n3\u20134 The twelve apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28; Luke 22:30)<br \/>\n4. \u201cAnd a[ll] your wall of precious stones.\u201d Its interpretation concerns the chiefs of the tribes of Israel<br \/>\n4. The names of the twelve tribes upon the twelve gates of the city (21:12).<\/p>\n<p>Now that Pesher Isaiah has demonstrated that the sublime and complex ideology the Apocalypse of John associates with the twelve apostles, already existed prior to Jesus\u2019 establishment of the apostleship, we must try to determine as best we can the meaning of the institution in the days of Jesus. More precisely, we should ascertain to what extent Jesus accepted the Essene ideology of \u201cthe twelve\u201d when he selected his apostles. For we have already seen that Jesus did not always accede to demands his apostles made based on this ideology. Moreover, the allusions to this ideology in the gospels are few and far between. There is one statement about Peter as the rock on which the church is to be founded\u2014though the authenticity of this logion (at least in its present form) is dubious. A second, presumably authentic saying involves the lofty status of the apostles in the final judgment. This is a promise involving the eschaton, and lacks the \u201cecclesiastical\u201d gravitas of the statements in Ephesians and Revelation that portray the apostles as the foundation of the church\u2014statements with clear parallels in Pesher Isaiah. The third statement, the one addressed to the sons of Zebedee, implies a critique of the apostles\u2019 demands concerning the lofty eschatological status promised them in the earlier verse. There is, moreover, no mention in the gospels of a privileged organization status for the twelve apostles. We are told only that they were chosen to be confidants to Jesus, to spread the news of the kingdom of heaven and to heal the sick. Does this mean that the apostleship preserved the lofty ideology it inherited from the corresponding Essene institution that served as a model for Jesus, but that Jesus\u2019 non-sectarian approach and deep humility prevented him from accepting this ideology in full? This would be too simplistic an answer, for we have already seen that Jesus contained an admixture of humility with an awareness of the uniqueness of his person and his mission. It is certainly possible that at times he accepted the lofty ideology of the apostleship, other times he rejected it. As for the paucity of information concerning the institution of the apostleship in the gospels, here too we must bear in mind one of the key rules in the study of the synoptic gospels: that the earlier sources tend to emphasize the humility of Jesus\u2019 message, and only rarely his supreme self-awareness. This may be due to the fact that these traditions circulated within the groups that preached his teachings to the Jewish masses, who might have rejected a gospel that emphasizes the other, unusually demanding aspect of Jesus\u2019 thought. It is possible, then, that the institution of the twelve apostles enjoyed a more elevated status in Jesus\u2019 teachings\u2014both organizationally and ideologically\u2014than the gospels allow. Similarly, Jesus himself (and not just the apostles) may have adhered to the ideology associated with the corresponding Essene institution, the same ideology that reappears in the Apocalypse of John.<br \/>\nWhatever the case, it is clear that even the gospels echo the symbolism and motifs that we find in Pesher Isaiah and Revelation. Even without the discovery of the Scrolls, we might have assumed that Jesus\u2019 statement that Peter is the rock upon which the church is to be founded is tied with the image of the apostles as the foundation stones of the early Christian community. It is very unlikely, however, that we would connect the statement that the apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel in the end of days, with the tradition (preserved in the Apocalypse of John) that identifies the twelve foundation stones of eschatological Jerusalem with the twelve precious stones of the priestly breastplate, stones that were used in judgment and bore the names of the twelve tribes. Pesher Isaiah, which includes this very tradition, represents a singular contribution to our understanding of the early Christian institution of the twelve apostles. No less important, it demonstrates that the more complicated concept is not always historically subsequent. It was the Apocalypse of John that preserved the complex pre-Christian ideology that sheds new light on the simple allusions in the gospels. It appears, then, that in matters of scholarship the simplest explanation is not always the best.<\/p>\n<p>22.      The Half-shekel in the Gospels and the Qumran Community<\/p>\n<p>The new discoveries teach us that, as a rule, scholars must first provide a thorough, grammatical analysis of the synoptic gospels, without any prior assumptions, with the sole goal of understanding the text as it stands. Only then, once this task has been accomplished, may we inquire after its goals and the circumstances surrounding its composition. If we reverse the order and investigate the setting of the gospel composition first, we will most likely not manage to understand the meaning of these texts.<br \/>\nThe reason scholars tend to reverse the order of investigation is simple: the plain meaning of the gospel text often appears strange and poorly suited to our understanding of early Christianity. Recent discoveries, however, and in particular the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, indicate that the plain sense of the gospels is in no way unreasonable. Quite the contrary\u2014apparently curious statements are the ones that rightly reflect the spiritual and religious views of contemporary Judaism.<br \/>\nA striking example of the recent discoveries facilitating the immanent understanding of the gospels is the question of the half-shekel, which is preserved only in Matthew: \u201cWhen they reached Capernaum the collectors of the half-shekel came to Peter and said, \u2018Does your teacher not pay the half-shekel?\u2019 He said, \u2018Yes, he does.\u2019 And when he came home, Jesus spoke of it first, asking, \u2018What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their children or from others?\u2019 When Peter said, \u2018From others,\u2019 Jesus said to him, \u2018Then the children are free. However, so that we do not give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook; take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a stater; take that and give it to them for you and me\u201d (Matt. 17:24\u201327).<br \/>\nMost scholars believe that this is not an authentic Jesus tradition, but was formed (during the Second Temple period) as part of a polemic within the early church regarding the payment of the half-shekel, and reflects the debate surrounding this issue among Jesus\u2019 followers. If so, it is undoubtedly no coincidence that the tax collectors address their question to Peter, the leader of the Jerusalem Church following the death of Jesus. In the Matthew story, the question of whether to pay the half-shekel is resolved by Jesus himself, thus establishing the position that the tax ought to be paid \u201cso that we do not give offense to them.\u201d But it appears the pro-payment view was so unpalatable in the Jerusalem Church that even its attribution to Jesus was not sufficient: the very heavens had to miraculously testify to this effect, so that the money did not come from Jesus and his disciples, but from the coin discovered in the fish!<br \/>\nBut while modern scholarship has rightly argued that the story of the half-shekel is the product of a Second Temple dispute within the Jerusalem Church, we cannot accept the same scholars\u2019 view as to the meaning of Jesus\u2019 conversation with Peter in this very story. These scholars assume that the \u201cchildren of kings\u201d in Jesus\u2019 parable refer to the Christians, while the others, who are obligated to pay the toll, are the Jews. It is certainly possible that this is how the author of Matthew understood the story, for it is only in this gospel that we find an explicit statement to the effect that the Kingdom of God was taken from Israel and given to the church (Matt. 21:43), and that in the end of days, \u201cthe heirs of the kingdom [= Israel] will be thrown into the outer darkness\u201d (Matt. 8:12). But this interpretation is untenable. That the parable portrays the Christians as exempt from the half-shekel payment because they are children of God is clear enough. But how can we assume that the parable argues that Israel must pay the half-shekel because they are \u201cothers\u201d who are enslaved to the king of kings who resides in the temple? On this interpretation the temple is the sanctuary of God and the half-shekel is the toll to God, but Israel is denigrated as a nation that is essentially foreign to God. Such an interpretation could only be right if we assume a view that affirms the sanctity of the temple but denies the election of Israel. But since there is no evidence for such an odd doctrine within the early church, there is no justification for the standard interpretation of the half-shekel parable\u2014assuming the Matthew parable is not terribly corrupt.<br \/>\nIf, however, we ignore the historical circumstances that gave rise to the parable, and concentrate solely on the text as it stands, it is quite clear: this is perhaps the closest of the gospel parables to the rabbinic parables, meshalim, that open with the phrase, \u201ca parable concerning a king of flesh and blood.\u201d Even the phrase \u201ckings of the earth\u201d is the biblical equivalent to the rabbinic \u201cking of flesh and blood,\u201d and both phrases point to the parallels that exist between terrestrial kings and their heavenly counterpart. As a rule, the rabbinic parables represent Israel with the figure of the son of the \u201cking of flesh and blood\u201d\u2014and in Matthew too we find the kings of the earth and their sons. Thus the most probable view is that in the Matthew parable too the sons of the king symbolize Israel. This interpretation resolves the key difficulty of the standard reading, i.e., attributing to the parable a positive valorization of the temple, but a negative view of Israel. All the same, interpreting the Matthew parable in the spirit of the rabbinic mashal raises new difficulties, particularly the position it seems to espouse: just as the children of earthly kings are not taxed by their fathers, so too the King of Kings, who resides in the Jerusalem temple, ought not demand that Israel pay him the annual half-shekel tax. What we have here, then, is a polemic against the collection of the temple tax from the Jews\u2014couched in terms of the traditional \u201cparable of a flesh and blood king\u201d genre!<br \/>\nIt thus appears to me that the immanent interpretation of this parable, namely that the children are Israel, can only be accepted if we can assume that there were parties contemporary with the composition of the Matthew parable who objected to the half-shekel payment to the temple. If such parties existed, we may conclude that the Jerusalem Church adopted the same view, at least in principle, and that the story in question was created as part of the debate surrounding this question. Scholarship into the origins of the half-shekel tax has dealt with this question, though without any effect on the understanding of the Matthew parable. One conclusion is that the Boethusians opposed the half-shekel payment, while E. Bickerman\u2019s analysis of Second Temple documents indicates the half-shekel tax is an ordinance formulated by the Hasmonean priests. The next step was taken by Y. Livor, who argues that the half-shekel pericope in Exodus 30:11\u201316 does not refer to an annual temple tax, but rather to a ransom payment for those that are absent. \u201cThe annual monetary contribution to the temple \u2026 was not made mandatory until the late Hasmonean period, if not later.\u201d Already these findings\u2014that the half-shekel contribution was a relatively late innovation that was not universally accepted\u2014might suggest that the half-shekel debate in Matthew echoes the opposing voices of those Jewish groups that argued that the new decree of an annual temple tax has no scriptural basis. A fragment of Qumran halakhah, published by Allegro and analyzed in detail by Livor, sheds new light on the question. From it we learn that the Boethusians were not the only group that opposed the annual half-shekel temple tax; the Qumran community also expressed their opposition to this tax: \u201cConcerning the ransom: the money of valuation which one gives as ransom for his own person will be half [a shekel], only once will he give it in all his days\u201d (4Q159 Fragment 1.6\u20137).<br \/>\nThe above investigation has shown, then, that the half-shekel tax was a Hasmonean innovation that was opposed by the Boethusians, thus removing the main objection to the notion that the Matthew parable reflects some (admittedly qualified) opposition to Israel\u2014and not just the Christian community\u2014paying the half-shekel. The 4QOrdinances fragment not only strengthens this assertion, but aids in interpreting the Matthew parable as well. It seems that Livor was right: \u201cThe emphatic \u2018only once will he give it in all his days,\u2019 which has no scriptural basis, expresses opposition to the annual half-shekel temple tax. The sages sought to link this tax to the biblical half-shekel, but the Dead Sea community opposed the annual temple tax from the outset.\u201d To be sure, Matthew\u2019s gospel does not argue that Jews are to pay the half-shekel only once in the course of their lifetime, but like the Qumran authors it expresses opposition to the half-shekel as a fixed annual tax. After all, the Matthew parable likens the payment to a \u03ba\u1fc6\u03bd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c2 (Latin: census), and there are in fact a number of similarities between the Roman tax and the half-shekel payment: both are preceded by a census, and both are paid annually. There is, however, one fundamental difference between the shekel payment and the census: the former is a payment by Israel to their temple in Jerusalem, while the latter is a sign that Israel has been enslaved to Rome and their ruler is not their true king, for God alone is the true king of Israel. As one rabbinic source states: \u201cI shall not appoint nor delegate anyone else, so to speak, to rule over you, but I myself will rule over you.\u201d This view, applied inflexibly to the contemporary political situation, famously gave rise to the Zealot movement. Already their founder, Judah the Galilean, demanded that the Jews not pay the annual tax to Rome and refuse to accept the rule of a king of flesh and blood, but only of the God of Israel. And what was the tax that instigated the Zealot movement? The census, the annual payment Rome required not of its sons, but of conquered foreigners. According to Cicero, this tax was a wage for victory and a punishment for the war itself. Clearly, Israel as a whole and the Zealots in particular were opposed to the Roman census. But when Jesus was asked about this tax he gave his famous answer: \u201cGive to the emperor the things that are the emperor\u2019s and to God the things that are God\u2019s\u201d (Mark 12:17). Jesus\u2019 answer is politically moderate and in this sense stands in contrast to the \u201cking of flesh and blood\u201d parable in Matthew. After all, if the key element of the latter is that the kings collect the tax from strangers but not from their sons, the implication is that the census is viewed with a dim eye indeed. Here, then, is another argument against counting the half-shekel parable among the authentic sayings of Jesus, whose position was apparently much more conciliatory.<br \/>\nBe all that as it may, the Matthew parable expresses opposition to the payment of the half-shekel, adopting a position similar to that of the Boethusians and the Qumran community. The argument against the tax goes as follows: the annual tax to the temple cannot be just, since the king of Israel\u2014God who resides in the temple\u2014would not impose on his sons a tax that the earthly kings impose on foreigners. I do not find this parable in any way typical of the Christian attitude toward Judaism and toward the temple. The question, then, is: in what Jewish circles did it originate? Clearly not among the rabbinic sages, since they affirmed that half-shekel payment and considered it a biblically sanctioned commandment. The spirit of the parable is similar to that of the Zealots, who opposed the census on the grounds that it implied Israel\u2019s submission to an earthly king. However, there is no evidence that the Zealots transferred this argument to the payment of the half-shekel, or that they even opposed the temple tax. The Qumran scrolls, in contrast, indicate that the Essenes claimed that each Jew should pay the half-shekel \u201conly once in all his days.\u201d As noted, this suggests the opposition was to the establishment of the half-shekel payment as an annual tax, much like the gospel position. It is possible, then, that there were some among the Essenes who based their claims against the half-shekel tax on an ideology of God\u2019s kingship over Israel, an ideology known particularly from the Zealots.<br \/>\nThat the half-shekel parable in Matthew is of Essene or related origin is suggested by the fact that the Jerusalem Church (where the parable was apparently formulated) inherited two social-religious positions from the Essenes: baptism and shared property. It may well be that along with these they also inherited the critique of the half-shekel payment. If so, the next question is whether the opposition expressed in the half-shekel parable was theoretical\u2014that is, the church continued to pay the tax to \u201cnot give offense to them\u201d\u2014or whether the practical resistance to the payment was also part of the Essene heritage. In fact, it appears the Jerusalem Church could not actively resist the temple tax, since it congregated at Solomon\u2019s Portico and regularly visited the temple; had they refused to pay the half-shekel they would undoubtedly not be able to remain in these sites. It is possible, then, that the early church received from their forerunners only the parable and its implicit resistance to the temple tax, but added to it Jesus\u2019 moderate position and then invented the miraculous fish story. Still, I believe it is far more likely that the Christians received the moderate position as well from the Essenes. After all, the apparent rejection of radical principles was one of the key elements in the Essene Weltanschauung. Indeed, acquiescence to the political authorities was typical of their \u201cconditional pacifism,\u201d which espoused \u201cEverlasting hatred for the men of the pit in clandestine spirit. To them he should leave goods and handmade items like a servant to his master and like one oppressed by someone domineering him.\u201d Note that when the tax collectors asked John the Baptist, who was close to the Essenes, what to do, he answered: \u201cCollect no more than the amount prescribed for you\u201d (Luke 3:12\u201313). In practical terms, he recognized the status of tax collectors working on behalf of Rome. The acquiescence to the political authorities in the matter of the temple tax could have similarly been inherited from the Essenes or from the disciples of John the Baptist.<br \/>\nIn summary, it is customary to explain Matthew\u2019s half-shekel parable as if it indicates that the Christians are exempt from the temple tax\u2014since they are the children of God\u2014while the Jews, who are strangers, must pay it. However, this interpretation raises a number of internal difficulties. Comparison to the rabbinic parable, the mashal, suggests that the children of the king are Israel, not the Christians. It appears, then, that the parable and its interpretation originate in the Jewish circles that opposed the half-shekel tax, viewing it as an innovation that has no scriptural basis. Up to this point we knew only that the Boethusians espoused this view, but the recently published Qumran text indicates that this was also the view of the Essene Dead Sea community, who held that Jews must pay the half-shekel tax only once in the course of their lives. Thus there is no reason to reject the simpler interpretation of Matthew 17 and identify the sons of the king with Israel. The conversation between Jesus and Peter suggests that the half-shekel ought not be paid since it is similar to the taxes the kings of Rome impose on the nations it has enslaved\u2014while the Jews are not slaves to God, but rather God\u2019s children. Even though the political notion of God\u2019s kingship over Israel that is reflected in Matthew is associated primarily with the Zealots, it appears that the parable originated in Essene or proximate circles. Moreover it seems that the Christians inherited from these circles not only the idea of a theoretical resistance to the half-shekel temple tax, but also the principle of practical acquiescence.<\/p>\n<p>title  Judaism of the Second Temple period<\/p>\n<p>publisher  William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co.; The Hebrew University Magnes Press<br \/>\nauthor  Flusser, David and Yadin, Azzan<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Foreword Those who do not know Hebrew may finally read the English versions of David Flusser\u2019s collected essays. The present volume, Judaism of the Second Temple Period: Qumran and Apocalypticism, is the culmination of a remarkable effort and collaboration on the part of translator Azzan Yadin and three publishers: Magnes Press, Jerusalem Perspective, and Eerdmans. &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/2020\/02\/19\/judaism-of-the-second-temple-period\/\" class=\"more-link\"><span class=\"screen-reader-text\">\u201eJudaism of the Second Temple period\u201c <\/span>weiterlesen<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2551","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2551","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2551"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2551\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2552,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2551\/revisions\/2552"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2551"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2551"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/buch.jehovah-shammah.de\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}