no atonement but repentance. Repentance atones for all transgressions,
yea, though a man be wicked all his days, and repent at last, none of
his wickedness is mentioned to him, for it is said, ‘As for the
wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby, in the day that he
turneth from his wickedness.’ (Ezek. xxxiii. 12.) The Day of Atonement
itself also atones for them that repent, for it is said, ‘For on that
day he shall make an atonement for you.’ Lev. xvi. 30.” (Hilchoth
T’shuvah, c. i. 2.) This is the last refuge of Jewish hope, and we,
therefore, propose to consider, whether it is a refuge on which a
reasonable man may hazard his hope of salvation? No man of sense would
hazard his life or his property upon a statement, of which one part
contradicted the other; and such is the statement which we have just
read. It first tells us, that in this present time “There is no
atonement but repentance,” and that “Repentance atones for all
transgressions;” and yet, immediately after, it adds, that “The Day of
Atonement itself atones for them that repent.” Now the latter assertion
contradicts the former. If the Day of Atonement, as is here asserted, be
necessary to atone for the penitent, then it is not true, that
repentance atones for all sins. But if repentance atones for all sins,
then when a man repents, his sins are forgiven, and then the Day of
Atonement is not necessary. There is here, therefore, a palpable
contradiction, and it cannot be safe to trust to a hope at variance with
itself. But, secondly, as the two parts of which this statement is
composed, contradict each other, so each of them is contrary to the law
of Moses. The first of them is, that “Repentance atones for all
transgressions;” but if so, then the atonement prescribed by Moses is
useless, in fact, it is no atonement at all. Moses says, that the two
goats were appointed by God for the atonement, but here it is said, that
repentance is, in itself, sufficient. If this be true, if repentance can
now atone for sins, without any sacrifice, why did Moses appoint such an
useless, and even cruel rite, as the taking away the lives of poor
innocent animals? If repentance be sufficient now, it was sufficient
always, and then it follows, that God commanded what was useless. But if
the appointment, the slaying of one goat, and the sending the other,
laden with the sins of the people, into the wilderness, was necessary
formerly to procure forgiveness of sins, it must be equally necessary
now: unless the rabbies will take upon them to assert, that God is an
arbitrary and changeable master, who, to forgive sins, at one time,
requires what at another time he does not require. That the slaying of
one goat, and the sending away of the other was once absolutely
necessary, no man can deny. Moses prescribes it so plainly, that if
there be one thing more plain than another, it is this, that when the
Jews were in their own land, repentance was not a sufficient atonement
for sins. Indeed, Rambam himself says:—
שעיר המשתלח מכפר על כל עבירות שבתורה הקלות והחמורות בין שעבר בזדון בין
שעבר בשגגה בין שהודע לו בין שלא הודע לו הכל מתכפר בשעיר המשתלח והוא שעשה
תשובה אבל אם לא עשה תשובה עין השעיר מכפר לו אלא על הקלות ׃
“The goat that was sent away atoned for all the transgressions mentioned
in the law, whether light or grave. Whether a man transgressed
presumptuously or ignorantly, consciously or inconsciously, all was
atoned for by the goat that was sent away, if a man repented. But if a
man did not repent, then the goat atoned only for the light offences.”
(Hilchoth T’shuvah, ibid.) We do not agree with the whole of this
doctrine, but we cite it to show, that formerly repentance was not a
sufficient atonement for sins, but that besides repentance, the goat, as
appointed by God, was also necessary. And we infer, that as an
atonement, besides repentance, was once necessary, it is necessary
still, unless the rabbies will affirm that God has changed his mind, and
abrogated the law of Moses. If repentance without any atonement be now
sufficient to procure forgiveness of sins, then, beyond all doubt, the
law of Moses is abrogated or changed. If the law of Moses be not
abrogated and not changed, then repentance alone cannot atone for sins;
and, therefore, this assertion of the oral law is false.
But the oral law endeavours to prove its assertion, by a citation from
Ezekiel, “As for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby
in the day that he turneth from his wickedness.” And it might be further
urged, that Ezekiel here mentions repentance only, and omits all notice
of sacrifice and the Day of Atonement. But the answer is easy. Either
Ezekiel meant, in this declaration, to repeal the law of Moses, or he
did not. If he meant to repeal the law of Moses, then the law is
repealed, and a new way of obtaining forgiveness, not taught by Moses,
has been introduced, and then the whole Jewish nation is, on their own
showing, palpably in the wrong in adhering to that which is repealed.
But if he did not mean to repeal the law of Moses, then he made this
assertion with that implied restriction which the law of Moses required;
that is, he implied the necessity of sacrifice: and then this passage
does not prove what the oral law asserts. But in every case, this first
assertion is contrary to the law of Moses.
It is, however, evident, that the rabbies themselves were dissatisfied
with their own assertion, for they immediately add to it a second, “That
the Day of Atonement itself atones for them that repent, as it is said,
‘For on that day he shall make an atonement for you.’” Notwithstanding
the confidence of their assertion about repentance, they did not feel
easy without some appearance of an atonement, and as they had no priest
and no victim, they say, that the day itself atones, and endeavour to
prove this assertion by a citation from Moses. But, unfortunately, this
citation entirely overthrows their assertion. Moses does not say:—
היום הזה יכפר עליכם ׃
“This day will atone for you,” but he says:—
ביום הזה יכפר עליכם ׃
“On that day he (the priest) shall atone for you.” Moses ascribes no
virtue whatever to the day itself, but only to the rites on that day to
be observed, and the person by whom they were performed. Moses
prescribes, first, a high-priest; Secondly, a goat, whose blood was
brought into the Holy of holies; and thirdly, a goat to be sent away: so
that where these three are wanting, nay, where any one of the three is
wanting, the conditions prescribed by Moses are not fulfilled, and there
is, therefore, no atonement. Without these three things the day itself
has no virtue, and is nothing different from the commonest day in the
year; and now, therefore, as they are all wanting, Israel has no
atonement. The assertion about the day itself, is a mere invention of
the rabbies, the only value of which is to show how deeply they felt the
insufficiency of repentance, and the necessity of a real atonement, in
order to procure remission of sins.
But the rabbies always betray themselves by adding something to make up
for the deficiency, of which they are sensible. We have seen this in
their assertion about merits, and so we find it here in their assertion
about atonement. They assert, that “The Day of Atonement itself atones
for the penitent,” but in spite of this, they have felt the need of
something more, which would a little better resemble real sacrificial
atonement; and hence has arisen the custom of sacrificing a cock on the
eve of that solemn day. The following account of this custom is given in
the קהלת שלמה, of which we have before us an edition published at
Breslau, so late as the year 1830; and it is selected, partly on account
of its recent publication, and partly because the directions how to act
are given in Jewish-German, which shows that they are intended even for
the most illiterate, and that the custom is not confined to a few
speculators, but is general amongst the people:—
סדר כפרות ׃
בני אדם יושבי חושך וצלמות אסירי עני וברזל , יוציאם מחושך וצלמות
ומוסרותיהם ינתק , אוילים מדרך פשעם ומעונינותיהם יתענו , כל אוכל תתעב
נפשם ויגיעו עד שערי מות , ויזעקו אל יי בצר להם ממצוקותיהם יושיעם , ישלח
דברו וירפאם וימלט משחיתותם , יודו ליי חסדו ונפלאותיו לבני אדם , אם יש
עליו מלאך מליץ אחד מני אלף להגיד לאד ישרו , ויחננו ויאמר פדעהו מרדת שחת
מצאתי כופר ׃
זה חליפתי , זה תמורתי , זה כפרתי , זה התרנגול ילך למיתה ואני עכנס ואלך
לחיים טובים ארוכים ולשלום ׃
“ORDER OF THE ATONEMENTS.—On the eve of the Day of Atonement, the custom
is to make atonements. A cock is taken for a man, and a hen for a woman;
and for a pregnant woman a hen and also a cock, on account of the child.
The father of the family first makes the atonement for himself, for the
high-priest first atoned for himself, then for his family, and
afterwards for all Israel.” The order is as follows:
_He takes the cock in his hand and says these verses_:
“The children of men that sit in darkness and the shadow of death, being
bound in affliction and iron; he brought them out of darkness and the
shadow of death, and brake their bands in sunder. Fools, because of
their transgression, and because of their iniquities, are afflicted.
Their soul abhorreth all manner of meat; and they draw near unto the
gates of death. Then they cry unto the Lord in their trouble; and he
saveth them out of their distresses. He sendeth his word, and healeth
them, and delivereth them from their destructions. O, that men would
praise the Lord for his goodness, and for his wonderful works, to the
children of men? (Psalm cvii.) If there be for him an angel, an
intercessor, one among a thousand, to show unto man his uprightness,
then he is gracious unto him, and saith, Deliver him from going down to
the pit; I have found a ransom.” (Job xxxiii. 23.)
_Whilst moving the atonement round his head, he says_,
“This is my substitute. This is my commutation. This cock goeth to
death, but may I be gathered and enter into a long and happy life, and
into peace.”
He then begins again at the words, “The children of men,” and so he does
three times.
Then follow the various alterations that are to be made, when the
atonement is made for a woman or another person, &c., and is added:—
“As soon as one has performed the order of the atonement, he should lay
his hands on it, as the hands used to be laid on the sacrifices, and
immediately after give it to be slaughtered.” This custom, extensively
prevalent amongst the Jews, proves abundantly the internal
dissatisfaction of the Jewish mind with their own doctrines, and the
deeply-rooted conviction of their heart, that without shedding of blood
there is no remission of sin. If they really believed that repentance,
or the Day of Atonement itself, or almsgiving, or merits, either their
own or their forefathers’, atoned for sin, they would never have devised
such a custom as this. But the spirit of the Mosaic law has taken too
deep a hold on the nation to suffer them to rest satisfied with anything
short of actual sacrifice; and as they have no high-priest and no altar
now, they make a sad and desperate attempt to tranquillize the mind with
this invention. The custom then, proves, that the rabbinical doctrine
respecting the atoning power of repentance is not believed nor heartily
received, even by the Rabbinists themselves, how, then, can a Jew hazard
his salvation on a doctrine which is contrary to the law of Moses, and
which its professors do not consider satisfactory? Will he rest upon the
self-devised sacrifice of a cock? God nowhere promises pardon to this
observance; and how can any man of sense be satisfied without a sure
promise of the unchanging and unchangeable Creator? This trust is as
unsatisfactory as any of those that we have already considered. Every
one of the rabbinic hopes has proved unsafe on examination. Personal
merit, the merit of ancestors, the blowing of the ram’s horn,
repentance, the present observance of the Day of Atonement, the
sacrifice of a cock, all are either directly opposed to, or unwarranted
by, the Word of God. How, then, is a Jew to obtain pardon for his sins?
The custom which we have just considered, speaks the sense of the Jewish
nation upon this subject, and plainly declares, that an atoning
sacrifice is the only real hope. It expresses, in the first place, the
heartfelt conviction, that every human being is guilty and needs an
atonement. It prescribes a victim for man, woman, and child, yea, even
for the unborn babe, thereby teaching that the nature of man is corrupt,
and that the hereditary guilt, even where there is no actual
transgression, must be washed away by the blood of atonement. It
expresses, further, the Jewish opinion as to the nature of sacrifice,
that the sins are laid upon the victim, and that the victim is
substituted for the guilty. Nothing can be plainer than the prescribed
formulary, “This is my substitute. This is my commutation. This is my
atonement.” It declares, further, that he who offers an atonement for
another, must himself be free from guilt, for it requires the father of
the family first to atone for himself, and then for those of his house.
These are the recorded sentiments of the Jewish nation, expressed not
only in words, but embodied in a solemn religious observance on the eve
of their most sacred season. By this act the Jews declare that an
atonement by blood is absolutely necessary. The law of Moses makes the
same declaration, by the appointment of all the rites for the Day of
Atonement. Is it, then, likely that the God of Israel would leave his
people without that which their hearts desire, and his law declares to
be necessary for salvation? Judaism says, Yes. It affirms, by an act
repeated every year, that sacrifice is necessary, and yet confesses, in
its solemn prayers, that they have none. It asserts, therefore, that God
has left them without that which is indispensable to procure
forgiveness. Christianity presents a more merciful view of the Divine
character. It does, indeed, acknowledge the necessity of atonement, but
it presents a victim and a high-priest, whose one offering is sufficient
for the sins of the whole world. It says, that God has left neither his
own people nor the Gentiles without the means of forgiveness, but sent
his righteous servant, the Messiah, to bear our sins in his own body
upon the tree. The Priest after the order of Melchisedek needed no
atonement to take away his own sins first, for he had none. Born in a
miraculous manner, by the power of God, his humanity inherited nothing
of the guilt of Adam, and as the Lord our Righteousness, he could
contract no taint of sin. He is, therefore, every way qualified to make
an atonement for us all. Our Christian hope, therefore, is not in a
cock, the sacrifice of which God never commanded, but in that great
atonement which He appointed. Our faith, our hope, our trust, are all
built upon God’s promise, and cannot be better expressed than in his
most holy words:—
והוא מחולל מפשעינו מדכא מעונותינו מוסר שלומנו עליו ובחברתו נרפא לנו ׃
“But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our
iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his
stripes we are healed.”
It cannot, therefore, be said, that we Christians rest our hope upon an
invention of our own. Our hope rests, not upon the dictates of our
priests or rabbies, but upon the words which God himself spake by the
mouth of his prophet. We can, therefore, confidently appeal to the Jews
themselves to decide, which of the two hopes is the most reasonable.
Both agreeing that an atonement, by the shedding of blood, is necessary
for the remission of sins, Rabbinism tells its disciples to trust to a
species of sacrifice nowhere mentioned in the Word of God. Christianity
tells us to trust in the sacrifice of that great Redeemer, for whose
salvation Jacob waited, whose atonement the Mosaic rites prefigured, and
the Jewish prophets predicted. Their hope rests upon the unwarranted
words of men; ours is built upon the Word of the living God, and is
involuntarily confirmed by the rabbies themselves in the very custom
which we have just considered. Even the nature of the victim is pointed
out in the selection of the animal. גבר (gever) signifies both “a man”
and “a cock,” and thereby signifies, that a righteous man must be the
sinful man’s substitute: and so some of the rabbies say, that this
animal, “a cock,” was selected,—
כיון ששמו גבר תמורת גבר בגבר ׃
“Because, as its name signifies ‘a man,’ there is a substitution of a
man for man.” (Orach Chaiim, 605.) The principles exactly agree, but
Christianity is directed in their application by the Word of God, to Him
who is, indeed, very man, but also THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS, יהוה.
צדקנו.
No. XXXVII.
FEAST OF TABERNACLES.
The progress of the year brings with it again that season, in which God
commanded his people to observe THE FEAST OF TABERNACLES; and the
constancy with which Israelites in every part of the world still observe
the rites and customs handed down by their forefathers, necessarily
commands respect and admiration. When we remember the many centuries
during which their dispersion has continued, the universal oppression
which they have been compelled to suffer, and the unmerited contempt
with which they have had to contend, we cannot but honour the strength
of moral courage which they have displayed, in thus observing and
handing down to their children a religion, which has been the cause of
their misfortunes. But this very constancy, and the respect which it
begets, naturally leads us to inquire whether the religious system
itself be true, and, therefore, worthy of that fidelity with which it
has been preserved; and, above all, whether this constancy is such as at
the last great day to meet the approbation of Him who judgeth not as man
judgeth. The professors of this system think, of course, that it is, and
that by observing these rites and ceremonies, they are keeping the
commands of God, and thereby ensuring his favour; and with regard to the
observance of the Feast of Tabernacles in particular, they are taught to
believe that they alone are so important, as at the day of judgment, to
prove Israel’s obedience, and the disobedience of the other nations. We
will first state the doctrines of modern Judaism on this subject, and
then examine whether they be well founded. In the Synagogue Prayers for
this feast we find it stated, that the construction of a tabernacle
according to rabbinic prescription, is a work of merit:—
חשובה ארבע אמות על ארבע , פסולה פחותה מארבע , כדי לזכות עם רובע ׃
“It must be four cubits long, and four cubits broad: but if it be less,
it is profane; that it may render the people of Israel meritorious. (P.
116.) And a little lower down, after describing the feast in Paradise on
the salted Leviathan and Behemoth, it adds, that this one precept will
form the last trial vouchsafed to the Gentiles, and that their
unwillingness to keep it will prove the cause of their final
condemnation:—
נכנסין כל האומות לדין , פני יושב על כסא דין , ובצדק אותנו ידין , סדר
מצוותיך תן לנו ונקימה , ונזכה עם אלו בנחמה , שגיא כח שוכן רומה , עליון
השופט כל באמונה , ישמיע להם בתבונה , יש לי מצוה קטנה , פירוש סוכה ושאליה
, ארבע דפנות וצל עליה , אל תרחקו מאליה , צללים לעשות בה יעטו , וחמה קדחה
עליהם ולוהטו , וברגליהם יבעטו , קדוש ישפוך עליהם חימה , ויפילם בגיהנם
בלי רחימה , במדרגה התחתונה במהומה ׃
“All nations will come to be judged in the presence of Him who sitteth
upon the throne of judgment; in righteousness will he judge us. _The
nations will then say_, Give us the order of thy precepts, and we will
perform them, that we may be equal with those in happiness, O Thou, who
art great in power, dwelling on high. The Most High, who judgeth all in
truth, will cause them to hear, and understand his words, saying, I have
one small precept; its name, tabernacle, and its ordinations: four
sides, and a shade over it: fail ye not to observe it. They then will
make the shadowy booths to abide under, but the sun will shine so hot as
nearly to burn them, when they will spurn at it with their feet. The
Holy One will then pour out his wrath upon them, and cast them into
gehinnom [hell] without mercy, into the lowest part with confusion.”
(Ibid.) This extraordinary account of the day of judgment, and the
condemnation of the Gentiles, has been adopted from the Talmud, where it
is given at great length, and all the particulars fully detailed. To
give the whole would occupy too much of our space; but as parts of it
are necessary to the full consideration of this subject, we give the
following extracts:—
לעתיד לבוא מביא הקב׳׳ה ספר תורה בחיקו ואומר כל מי שעסק בה יבוא ויטול
שכרו מיד מתקבצין ובאין אומות הצולם בערבוביא שנאמר כל הגוים נקבצו יחדו ,
אמר להם הקב׳׳ה אל תכנסו לפני בערבוביא אלא תכנס כל אומה ואומה וסופריה ׃
“In the time to come, the Holy One, blessed be He, will bring a roll of
the law in his bosom, and say, Let every one, who has occupied himself
herein, come and receive his reward. Immediately the nations of the
world will gather themselves together, and come in promiscuous crowds,
as it is said, ‘Let all the nations be gathered together.’ (Isaiah
xliii. 9.) The Holy One, blessed be He, will then say, Come not before
me promiscuously, but let each nation come by itself along with its
learned men.” Then follows an account of the appearance of each nation,
and of the vain attempts which they make to justify their conduct. After
which the narrative thus proceeds:—
אומרים לפניו רבונו של עולם ישראל שקבלוה היכן קיימוה אמר להם הקב׳׳ה אני
מעיד בהם שקיימו את התורה , אומרים לפניו רבונו של עולם כלום יש אב שמעיד
על בנו דכתיב בני בכורי ישראל אמר להם הקב׳׳ה שמים וארץ יעידו בהם שקיימו
את התורה כולה , אומרים לפניו רבונו של עולם שמים וארץ נוגעין בעדותן שנאמר
אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חוקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי , ואמר ר׳ שמעון בן לקיש
מאי דכתיב ויהי ערב ויהי בוקר יום הששי , מלמד שהתנה הקב׳׳ה במעשה בראשית
ואמר אם ישראל מקבלין את תורתי מוטב ואם לאו אחזיר אתכם לתוהו ובוהו והיינו
דאמר חזקיה מאי דכתיב משמים השמעת דין ארץ יראה ושקטה אם יראה למה שקטה ואם
שקטה למה יראה אלא בתחלה יראה ולבסוף שקטה , אמר להם הקב׳׳ה מכם יבואו
ויעידו בהן בישראל שקיימו את התורה כולה , יבוא נמרוד ויעיד באברהם שלא עבד
ע׳׳ז יבוא לבן ויעיד ביעקב שלא נחשד על הגזל תבוא אשת פוטיפרע ותעיד בחנניה
מישאל ועזריה שלא השתחוו לצלם יבוא דריוש ויעיד בדניאל שלא ביטל את התפלה
יבוא בלדד השוחי וצופר הנעמתי ואליפז התמני ואליהו בן ברכאל הבוזי ויעידו
בהן בישראל שקיימו את התורה כולה שנאמר יתנו עדיהן ויצדקו , אמרו לפניו
רבונו של עולם תנו לנו מראש ונעשה אמר להם הקב׳׳ה שוטים שבעולם מי שטרח
בערב שבת יאכל בשבת מי שלא טרח בערב שבת מהיכן יאכל בשבת אלא אע׳׳פ כן מצוה
קלה יש לי וסוכה שמה לכו ועשו אותו , ומי מצית אמרת הכי והא אמר ר׳ יהושע
בן לוי מאי דכתיב אשר אנכי מצוך היום היום לעשותם ולא למחר לעשותם היום
לעשותם ולא היום ליטול שכר אלא שאין הקב׳׳ה בא בטרוניא עם בריותיו ואמאי
קרי ליה מצוה קלה משום דלית ביה חסרון כיס מיד כל אחד נוטל והולך ועושה
סוכה בראש גגו והקב׳׳ה מקדיח עליהם המה בתקופת תמוז וכל אחד ואחד מבעט
בסוכתו ויוצא וכו׳ ׃