first temple, that is, they commemorate the idolatry of the chief
priests and the people. They remember that the learned and the unlearned
of the nation rejected the true God and turned to dumb idols. How then
can the Jews say that it is impossible for a nation, that openly
rejected the God of their fathers, to reject the Messiah? There can be
no greater proof of folly and wickedness than to reject God and worship
a stock or a stone; but of this Israel has been guilty, and because of
this sin the first temple was destroyed. The man who rejects the true
God will also reject his messenger. But Israel has done the one, why
then should it be denied that they could do the other? The only possible
answer that can be given is, that the priests and the people were a
great deal wiser and better in the days of Jesus than in those of the
first temple. But if this be true, why was the temple destroyed? why
were those who were so much wiser and better, punished with a more
dreadful punishment than those who were so much more foolish and wicked?
If we are to judge of the comparative wisdom and piety of the two by the
measure of punishment, then we must say, that the idolatrous priests and
people of the first temple were a great deal wiser and better than the
priests and people of the second temple, for the former escaped, after a
captivity of seventy years, the latter have been exiled for seventeen
centuries. The tremendous nature of the punishment would show, that the
priests and people, who rejected Jesus, were more wicked than their
idolatrous forefathers, and if so, their testimony against Jesus is of
no value.
But the Jews also commemorate on this day the destruction of the city of
Bither, that is, they commemorate the folly of all their greatest
rabbies in following an impostor, and believing in him as their Messiah.
There Bar Kochav took refuge with those whom he deluded. Rambam says,
“All Israel, and the greatest of their wise men, imagined him to be the
Messiah,” and we know that the famous Rabbi Akiva was amongst the
number. Here, then, we have practical proof that the judgment of those
rabbies, who rejected Jesus, was not to be depended upon. If they had
succeeded in their efforts, they would have taught all Israel to believe
in an impostor; but the providence of God gave them all over to
destruction in the very act of following a false prophet. And yet these
are the men who have handed down the oral law, and compiled the precepts
of rabbinic religion; men, whom the Jews themselves tell us, were the
followers of a false prophet and the dupes of an impostor. How can they
possibly believe in a system which has such men for its authors; men who
seduced thousands and tens of thousands of Israel to plunge themselves
into ruin? If Rabbi Akiva, and his colleagues, had not espoused the
cause of Bar Kochav, he could never have succeeded in deluding such
numbers of Israelites; they, therefore, are answerable for that dreadful
calamity. But when the Jews of the present day commemorate the sore
affliction, should they not remember also that it is high time to give
up that religious system that was the cause of it, and of all the evils
that have since followed; or at least seriously and carefully
investigate a religion, fidelity to which is compatible with the
departure of God’s favour, the destruction of the temple, and a long and
awful captivity?
No. XXIX.
SABBATIC LAWS CONTINUED.
In our last number but one the Bible-doctrine, that true religion must
necessarily promote the happiness of man, was laid down as the basis of
our reasonings. The truth of the principle is admitted by every thinking
man, whether Jew or Christian; but plain as it is, it is frequently
overlooked, and a large portion of mankind is accustomed to look on
religion and its ordinances, not as blessings in themselves, nor as a
course of moral discipline devised by the wisdom of God for the good of
man, but as a system of arbitrary enactments instituted to give men an
opportunity of treasuring up a store of merit, and of earning an eternal
reward. Hence in all the superstitions, which man has invented, we
perceive an undue regard for the mere external act; and an expectation
that the performance of the act will ensure the Divine favour. Thus the
modern Hindoo stands on a sharp spike, or suspends his poor body by an
iron hook, or offers it to be crushed under the wheels of the idol’s
chariot, and thinks thereby to purchase eternal felicity. And thus also
the more ancient idolaters, the worshippers of Baal, in the time of
their need, wounded themselves with knives and lances, and expected that
for such meritorious religious observances their prayers should be heard
and that they should have a blessing. But it is possible, without
professing a totally false religion, to view God’s true commandments in
the same light, and overlooking the spirit and the object of his
institution, to fix the whole attention upon the letter or outward act,
and the quantum of reward which it may purchase. This the rabbies have
done, particularly, in reference to the institution of the Sabbath-day.
They appear to have forgotten altogether that the Sabbath was made for
man as a blessing and means of grace, and have therefore in their
attempts to promote the observance of the day, entirely sacrificed the
peace, comfort, and happiness of man to the mere appearance of
preserving the letter of the command inviolate. Their fundamental idea
of keeping the Sabbath-day is, that it is an act of obedience whereby
something may be purchased.
גרסינו בפ׳ כל כתבי אמר ר׳ יוחנן משום ר׳ יוסי כל המענג את השבת נותנין לו
נחלה בלי מצרים , רב נחמן בר יצחק אומר אף ניצול משיעבוד מלכיות , אמר רב
יהודה אמר רב כל המענג את השבת נותנין לו משאלות לבו , ואמר ר׳ חייא בר אבא
אמר ר׳ יוחנן , כל המשמר שבת כהלכתה אפילו עובד ע׳׳ז כאנוש מוחלין לו , אמר
רב יהודה אמר רב אלמלא שמרו ישראל שבת ראשונה כהלכתה לא שלטה בהם אומה
ולשון אמר ר׳ שמעון בר יוחי אלמלא משמרים ישראל שתי שבתות מיד נגאלין ׃
“We read in the sixteenth chapter of the treatise Shabbath, R. Johanan
says, in the name or R. Jose, that to every one who makes the Sabbath a
delight, an infinite inheritance is given. Rav Nachman, the son of Isaac
says, He shall, besides, be delivered from serving the monarchies. R.
Judah says, Rav says, To every one who makes the Sabbath a delight, the
desires of his heart are given. R. Chiia, the son of Abba, says, in the
name of Rabbi Johanan, whosoever keeps the Sabbath according to its
constitutions, even though he were an idolater like Enosh, he shall be
forgiven. R. Judah says, Rav says, If Israel would keep the first
Sabbath according to its constitutions, no nation nor tongue should rule
over them. R. Simeon, the son of Jochai, says, If Israel would keep two
Sabbaths, they should be immediately delivered.” (Arbah Turim. Orach
Chaim, § 242.) Thus the rabbles sanction the false and superstitious
notion, that an external act can purchase the favour of God, and even
atone for the most atrocious violation of the divine law. The Israelites
are taught to believe that if they would only observe the Sabbath
according to the rabbinic constitution, all their other transgressions
would immediately be forgiven, and they themselves restored to the land
of their fathers, and in the meanwhile the individual sinner is told not
to be uneasy, for that if he had committed idolatry, the most heinous
offence against God, the observation of the rabbinical precepts
respecting the Sabbath will wipe away the score. What then will he
think, who has ever kept himself outwardly from this capital offence,
and only been guilty, as he thinks, of sinning against his neighbour? He
will make sure that the Sabbath observance will wipe out the week’s
reckoning, and commence his sinful career again the following week with
the assurance that if he only live until the Sabbath-day, he can make
all good again. And thus the Sabbath-day, ordained by God for the
purpose of nurturing true religious feeling, is by the oral law turned
into the means of eradicating all religious principle out of the heart.
The end for which the external observance was instituted, is not only
forgotten, but misrepresented. The holy affections which it was meant to
produce and nourish as a preparation for eternity are overlooked, and
the mere outward form held up as the price which men are to pay for
eternal felicity.
That the rabbinical laws are almost altogether occupied with the merest
external observances will be plain to any one who will take the trouble
to read them through. Take, for instance, some of the laws which refer
to the keeping food warm on the Sabbath-day:—
מניחין קדרה על גבי האש או בשר בתנור או על גבי גחלים והם מתבשלים והולכין
כל השבת ואוכלין אותו בשבת ויש בדבר זה דברים שהם אסורים גזירה שמא יחתה
בגחלים בשבת , כיצד תבשיל שלא בשל כל צרכו וחמין שלא הוחמו כל צרכן או
תבשיל שבישל כל צרכו וכל זמן שמצטמק הוא יפה לו אין משהין אותו על גבי האש
בשבת אע׳׳פ שהונח מבעוד יום , גזירה שמא יחתה בגחלים כדי להשלים בשולו או
כדי לצמקו , לפיכך אם גרף האש או שכסה אש הכירה באפר או בנעורת הפשתן הדקה
או שעממו הגחלים שהרי הן כמכוסין באפר או שהסיקוה בקש או בגבבה או בגללי
בהמה דקה שהרי אין שם גחלים בוערות הרי זה מותר לשהות עליה שהרי הסיח דעתו
מזה ואין גוזרין שמא יחתה באש ׃
“It is lawful to leave a pot on the fire, or meat in the oven or upon
the coals, and although the cooking thus continues, it is lawful to eat
them on the Sabbath. But in this matter there are some things forbidden,
and the cause of the prohibition is lest any man should stir the fire on
the Sabbath. For example, food that has not been cooked as much as it
requires, or hot water that has not been sufficiently heated, or food
which has had the requisite cooking, but which improves all the time
that it is left to stew, must not be left on the fire on the Sabbath,
even though it may have been placed there, whilst it was yet day on the
Friday. This has been decreed, lest one should stir the coals in order
to finish the cooking thereof, or to stew it. Therefore, if the fire be
swept up, or covered with ashes, or with the coarse part of flax, or if
the coals have ceased to glow, for then they are looked upon as covered
with ashes, or if the fire had been made with straw or stubble, or with
the dung of small cattle, then, as there are no burning coals, it is
lawful to leave the food there on the Sabbath, for in this case the
man’s mind will be turned away from the cooking, and the only object of
the decree is, lest the fire should be stirred.” (Hilchoth Shabbath, c.
iii. 3.) No one can deny that this passage prescribes the merest outward
observances. The general principle is that it is not lawful to stir the
fire on the Sabbath, for that would be doing work, and from this follow
those other prohibitions of all things which might tempt a man to be
guilty of this grave offence. But they all refer to outward acts, from
which it is easy for any one, without any great exertion of self-denial,
or any advance in moral discipline, to abstain, and yet he has all the
merit and satisfaction of the most self-denying piety, and thinks that
he is thereby paying a part of the price of his salvation, and making
atonement for the gravest moral transgressions of which he may have been
guilty during the week. Take, again, the following precepts, and say
whether they be not of the very same character:—
מי שהחשיך לו בדרך בערב שבת ועמו כיס אם יש עמו נברי וחמור יתן כיסו לנכרי
אף לאחר שתחשך ולא יניחנו על החמור , אבל אם מצא מציאה אינו יכול ליתנה
לנכרי אלא אם כן באה לידו מבעוד יום דהשתא הויא ככיסו , אין עמו נכרי
יניחנה על החמור כשהוא הולך ויזהר ליטול ממנו בכל שעה שיעמוד , וכשיחזור
וילך יניחנו עליו , היה עמו חמור וחרש שוטה וקטן יניחנו על החמור ולא יתננה
לאחד מאלה כיון שהם אדם כמותו , היה עמו חרש ושוטה יתננו לשוטה לפי שאין לו
דעת כלל , שוטה וקטן יתננו לשוטה שהקטן יבוא לכלל דעת , חרש וקטן יתננה למי
שירצה , אין עמו לא זה ולא זה יטלטלנו פחרת פחות מארבע אמות ׃
“If a man travelling on the Sabbath-eve be overtaken by night,[28] and
has with him a purse, and there be also with him a Gentile and an ass,
let him give his purse to the Gentile, even after it be dark, but let
him not lay it on the ass.[29] But if he find anything, he may not give
it to the Gentile, unless it came into his hand whilst it was yet day,
for then it is a similar case to that of his purse. If there be no
Gentile with him, then let him lay it on the ass, whilst he is moving,
but let him take great care to take it off every time he stands still.
But when he begins to move again, then let him lay it on. If there be
with him an ass, and a deaf and dumb person, an idiot and a child, then
let him lay it on the ass, but let him not give it to one of these, for
they are human beings like himself. If there be with him a deaf and dumb
person and an idiot, let him give it to the idiot, as he has no
understanding at all. If an idiot and a child, let him give it to the
idiot, for the child will be reckoned amongst those that have
understanding. If a deaf and dumb person and a child, let him give it to
whichever he pleases. If there be with him neither one nor the other,
let him move it along gradually, each time less than four ells.” (Orach
Chaim, sec. 266.) Here again the great concern is to observe the form
and letter of the rabbinical command, which represents the carrying of a
purse on the Sabbath-day as work, and therefore unlawful. The law of
Moses says nothing either one way or the other, but leaves it to every
man’s conscience. The rabbies who made it unlawful soon found that
serious inconvenience might arise, as in the case of a man on a journey
overtaken by the Sabbath, before he could get to a resting-place. What
is he to do, is he to leave his purse behind rather than profane the
Sabbath? That alternative the Pharisees did not like, and therefore set
their wits to work to devise some plan, whereby the outward form might
be observed, and yet the purse be safely conveyed along with its
proprietor. In the first place, they allow it to be given to a Gentile,
but every man of common sense will see that this only saves the outward
appearance, for it be unlawful to carry the purse, it must be equally
unlawful to cause it to be carried, for he who commands or causes work
to be done is really and in the sight of God the doer, just as he who
hires a man to murder a third person is in reality the murderer. If,
therefore, the Jew dare not carry the purse himself, neither may he give
it to a Gentile, nor an idiot, nor a child, nor even lay it upon his
ass. This case only shows the insincerity of the Scribes and Pharisees,
and their love of money rather than of God’s commandment. In other cases
they lay it down as a law that no Jew is to ask a Gentile to do work for
him on the Sabbath:—
אסור לומר לגוי לעשות לנו מלאכה בשבת אע׳׳פ שאינו מצווה על השבת ואע׳׳פ
שאמר לו מקודם השבת ואע׳׳פ שאינו צריך לאותה מלאכה אלא לאחר השבת ודבר זה
אסור מדברי סופרים כדי שלא תהיה שבת קלה בעיניהן ויבואו לעשות בעצמן ׃
“It is unlawful to tell a Gentile to do work for us on the Sabbath,
although the Sabbath command is not binding upon him, and although he
told him before the Sabbath, and even though he should not require that
work until after the Sabbath. This prohibition is of the words of the
Scribes, and was made to prevent Israelites from thinking lightly of the
Sabbath, and thus coming at last to do the work themselves.” (Hilchoth
Shabbath, c. vi. 1.) Here, then, the very thing which is allowed above,
is expressly forbidden on the authority of the Scribes, and consequently
a transgression would make a man liable to be flogged, as is expressly
stated in this chapter:—
ישראל שאמר לגוי לעשות לו מלאכה זו בשבת אע׳׳פ שעבר ומכין אותו מכת מרדות ,
מותר לו ליהנות באותה מלאכה לערב אחר שימתין בכדי שתעשה ׃
“An Israelite who tells a Gentile to do a certain work for him on the
Sabbath, although he has transgressed, and is to be flogged with the
flogging of rebellion, yet he may lawfully make use of that work when
the Sabbath is over, if he wait as long as it would take to accomplish
the work.” (Ibid. 8.) These two passages, then, plainly contradict each
other. The one says it is unlawful to tell a Gentile to do work on the
Sabbath, and that he who does so is to be flogged. The other permits a
Jew to give a Gentile his purse to carry, and this is work, or else the
Jew might carry it himself. Now if the latter case be lawful, then the
former is also lawful; and it is most cruel and tyrannical to flog a man
for doing what is lawful. On the other hand, if, according to the
general rule, it be unlawful, then it is plainly unlawful in this
particular case; and it is plain that the Scribes, with all their
pretensions, thought it better to transgress what they considered a
Divine command, then to lose their money. But if the traveller has got
neither an ass, nor an idiot, nor a Gentile with him, then there is
apparently no way of escape, for it is unlawful, according to the oral
law, to carry any burden more than a distance of four ells on the
Sabbath-day; and one would naturally expect, that those who punish a
profanation of the Sabbath with stoning or flogging—that is, who spare
neither human blood nor life—would tell him to leave his purse, rather
than transgress the Divine command. But no, they tell him to carry it
less than four ells, then to lay it down, take it up and carry it again
a distance of less than four ells, and thus, bit by bit, carry it to the
first inn. Here, again, there is an appearance of preserving the letter
of the rabbinical command; but no man in his senses can see that there
is any real difference between carrying it at one turn, or at five
hundred short turns of less than four ells, the whole distance is just
the same, and the work just the same in the sight of God. Either it is
altogether lawful, and then the rabbinical precepts appear as folly and
tyranny, or it is altogether unlawful, and then these precepts appear as
a mere evasion and a trick. But, in every case, a cheap way is presented
for purchasing salvation, and atoning for past sin. There is no great
exertion of moral principle necessary to make the traveller let another
person, or an ass carry his purse to an inn.
Another part of the rabbinical mode of observing the Sabbath, the
preparation of the Sabbath table, has just the same tendency to direct
the mind to the mere external act:—
ויסדר שלחנו ויציע המטות ויתקן כל עניני הבית כדינ שימצאנו ערוך ומסודר
בבואו מבית הכנסת , דאמר ר׳ יוסי בר חנינא שני מלאכי השרת מלוין לו לאדם
בערב שבת מבית הכנסת לביתו אחד טוב ואחד רע כשבא לביתו מצא נר דלוק ושלחן
ערוך ומטה מוצעת מלאך טוב אומר יהי רצון שיהא כו לשבת הבאה ומלאך רע עונה
אמן בעל כרחו ואם לאו מלאך רע אומר יהי רצון שיהא כן לשבת הבאה ומלאך טוב
עונה אמן בעל כרחו ׃
“Let a man arrange his table and spread the couches, and order all the
affairs of his house, that he may find it ready and ordered when he
returns from the synagogue; for Rabbi Jose says, in the name of Rabbi
Chanina, That two angels accompany a man on the Sabbath eve, on his
return from the synagogue, the one good, the other evil. When he comes
to his house, if the Sabbath lamp be found lighted, and the table
prepared, and the couch spread, the good angel says, God grant that it
may be so the next Sabbath; and the evil angel must say Amen, in spite
of himself. But if this be not the case, then the evil angel says, God
grant that it may be so on the next Sabbath, and then the good spirit
must say Amen, in spite of himself.” (Orach Chaiim, § 262.) Let not the
Israelite think that we object to the decent and reverential preparation
of the house for the Sabbath, that is all right and proper; but to exalt
this into a command, and represent obedience to it as a meritorious act,
is to turn the mind to trivial outward performances, and to teach men to
rest on them as on the great duties of religion. And here the mere
putting of the house into order is represented as so grave a matter,
that two angels are sent home with every Israelite on the Sabbath eve,
to take cognizance of the matter. The story of the angels is evidently a
fable, and is another proof of the fictitious character of the oral law;
but it shows how the rabbies wandered from the substance of religion to
the mere shadow of external observances. The Sabbath lamp here mentioned
is another instance of the same kind:—
ויהא זהיר לעשות נר יפה דאמר רב הונא הרגיל בנר שבת להשתדל בו לעשותו יפה
הוין ליה בנים תלמידי חכמים ׃
“Let a man be careful to have a handsome lamp, for Rav Huna says, He
that is accustomed to take great care in trimming his Sabbath lamp well,
will have children who shall be disciples of the wise, _i.e._ learned
men.” No one can deny that this is a mere external act, but yet it is
represented as meritorious, and payment is promised: but the mode in
which the performance is required is still more calculated to promote
the idea, that this external act is of great importance:—
ואחד אנשים ואחד נשים חייבין להיות בבתיהן נר דלוק בשבת אפילו אין לו מה
יאכל שואל על הפתחים ולוקח שמן ומדליק את הנר שזה בכלל עונג שבת וחייב לברך
קודם הדלקה ברוך אתה יי אלהינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצוותיו וצונו להדליק
נר של שבת ׃
“Men and women are equally obligated to have a lighted lamp in their
house on the Sabbath. Yea, though a man have nothing to eat, he must beg
from door to door, and get oil, and light the lamp, for this is an
essential part of the Sabbath delight. He is also bound to pronounce the
benediction, Blessed art thou, O Lord, King of the world! who has
sanctified us by his commandments, and commanded us to light the Sabbath
lamp.” (Hilchoth Shabbath, c. v. 1.) Of course every Jew, who thinks
that a Sabbath lamp is as necessary as food, and that God requires it
even from him that has no food, must think that it is of great value,
and that obedience to this command is a most meritorious act. And yet
all must confess that it is a mere outward performance, which may be
observed by him who has neither the fear nor the love of God. The
tendency of all these laws is the same, that is, to draw the mind away
from the solemn duties of religion, and to persuade the impenitent
sinner that these observances will atone for his transgressions. When
conscience reminds him of sins, not those which he has committed long
since, of which he has repented, and which, he has forsaken, but of
those which he has been committing the past week, and intends to commit
again, as soon as the Sabbath is over, it is silenced by an enumeration
of the various acts of obedience, which are to be set down at the other
side of the account. He remembers that he has never left a pot of
victuals on a forbidden fire, nor carried his purse on the Sabbath-day a
distance of more than four ells, nor asked a Gentile to do work for him.
That, on the contrary, he has always prepared his table, and lighted his
Sabbath lamp, and pronounced the benediction; or, in other words, that
he has kept the Sabbath according to its constitution, and that,
therefore, though he had been guilty of idolatry, he shall obtain
forgiveness. Thus these rabbinic precepts have a direct tendency to
mislead the multitude, to harden them in sin, and thus to make and keep
them unfit for that great Sabbath, which yet remains for the people of
God.
Footnote 28:
That is, if the Sabbath commence before he can get to a resting place.
Footnote 29:
דחמור אתה מצווה על שביתתו ולא דנכרי ׃
For thou art commanded respecting the resting of the ass, but not
respecting that of the Gentile.
No. XXX.
SABBATIC LAWS CONTINUED.