law. What use is it then to talk of the pious of the world, or to say that people of other religions may be saved? According to the Talmud, there are no pious of the nations, unless perchance there may be some descendants of those who were received 2700 years ago. But all history that we have ever seen is silent on the subject. We do not know of a single congregation of Noahites in the whole world. The forefathers of the Christians were not received during the year of jubilee. They were idolaters received against the wishes of the Rabbinists. The Britons and the Saxons were converted to Christianity long after the final dispersion of the Jews, that is, at a time when, according to the Talmud, it was unlawful to add to the pious amongst the nations. Neither were they received according to the Talmudic condition, in the presence of three learned Jews. וצריך לקבל עליו בפני שלשה חברים heathen to be left for 2,700 years without the means of instruction, and that when the days cf Israel's prosperity come, the nations are to be converted by force; but that even then, they will not be raised to the rank of brethren, but only be sojourning proselytes. The oral law looks forward to no reunion of all the sons of Adam into one happy family. The New Testament has, on the contrary, commanded its disciples to afford the means of instruction" to every creature." It speaks to us Gentiles, who were once regarded as poor outcasts, in the language of love, and says, "Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God." (Ephes. ii. 19.) It takes nothing from you. It asserts your privileges as the peculiar people of God; but it reveals that great, and to us, most comfortable truth, "That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body;" "And it is necessary for such an one to take and it promises a happy time, when there the seven commandments on him in the pre- shall be one fold and one Shepherd. It does, sence of three learned men, who are qualified indeed, tell us not to forget what we once were, to be rabbies." (Hilchoth Melachim, c. viii. "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, 10.) According to the oral law, then, there and strangers from the covenant of promise, are no such persons now existing as "the having no hope, and without God in the pious of the nations of the world." It is, world." (Eph. ii. 12.) It reminds us that therefore, idle to talk of the liberality with the olive-tree is Jewish, and that you are the which they would be treated, were they forth- natural branches, and warns us against all coming. Thus the only appearance of an boasting. (Rom. xi. 16—24.) And we desire argument in favour of the Talmud vanishes to remember these admonitions, and to acinto thin air, and mocks our grasp, as soon knowledge with thankfulness, that all that we as we endeavour to lay hold of it. Those have received, is derived from the Jewish who caught at this phantom of charity, no nation. We ask you not to compare the oral doubt meant it sincerely. They thought that law with any Gentile speculations, or systems, the oral law was misrepresented. They were or inventions, but with doctrines essentially told that it was charitable, and they therefore and entirely Jewish. Christianity has efnobly came forward in its defence. If they fected great and glorious changes in the world, had known its true principles, they would but we take not the glory to ourselves. We have renounced them. Their advocacy went give it to God, who is the author of all good, on a false supposition. But now that we and under Him, to the people of Israel. We have set forth the true bearings of the case, ask you, then, to compare these two Jewish and given them chapter and verse to which systems, Rabbinism, which has done no good they may refer, and convince themselves, we to the Gentiles, and perpetuated much error call upon them to do so: and then, as they amongst the Jews; and Christianity, which hate intolerance, to join with us in protesting has diffused over the world the knowledge of against it, even though it should be found in the one true God-disseminated the writings that system, which hitherto they have believed, of Moses and the prophets, and increased the on the testimony of others, to be divine. At happiness of a large portion of mankind. The the same time we would seriously ask of comparison may require time, and ought to them to compare this system, which has been be conducted with calmness and seriousness. for more than 1700 years the religion of the But we think that, even without instituting majority of the Jewish nation, with the system that comparison, you must acknowledge that laid down in the New Testament, and to the principles of the oral law, discussed in decide which is most agreeable to the character this paper, are contrary to the law of Moses; of God, as revealed in the law and the pro- and that, therefore, a decided and solemn phets, and most beneficial to the world. The protest against these Rabbinical additions, is oral law says, that God has commanded the an immediate and imperative duty, London:- Sold at the London Society's Office, 16, Exeter-hall, Strand; by James Duncan, Paternosterrow; and B. Wertheim, 57, Aldersgate-street. This publication may be had by applying at No. 5, No. 7, or No. 13, Palestine-place, Bethnal-green. עמדו על דרכים וראו ושאלו לנתבות עולם • ירמיה ו' טז' NUMBER 10.] "THE OLD PATHS."-JER. vi. 16. FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1836. [PRICE ONE-PENNY. Each of these four limitations requires new THERE are various marks by which a religion of man's making may be detected. It is usually intolerant, superstitious, and voluminous. It limits the love of God to a particular class. It exalts ceremonial observances above the worship of the heart; and so multiplies its laws and definitions, as to put the knowledge of it beyond the reach of any but the learned. Any one of these marks would go far towards shaking the claims of a religious system. For instance, if it lay down as religious duties so many and such subtle laws, as it is impossible for the unlearned to attain a knowledge of, it is plainly the invention of the learned, who have thought only of themselves, and have not that tender regard and consideration for the ignorant, which the Creator has. His religion must be for all, the poor as well as the rich, and the ignorant as well as the wise of this world. We fear that the oral law of the rabbies will not stand any one of these tests; it is, at all events, a Every thing that is an impediment in religion for the learned, and the learned only. baptism is an impediment in washing of There is scarcely one of its commandments hands." (Hilchoth Mikvaoth xi. 2.) This, that is not so encumbered with distinctions of course, leads to a new inquiry, what conand definitions, as to make the right interprestitutes an impediment. 66 כל החוצץ בטבילה חוצץ בידים וכו' אלו חוצצין באדם • לפלוף שחוץ לעין • וגלד שחוץ | .tation of it the sole property of the educated למכה • והדם יבש שעל גבי המכה • והרטייה שעליה וגלדי צואה שעל בשרו : ובצק או טים שתחת הצפורן * והמלמולין שעל הגוף וטיט היון וטיט היוצרים וכו' Take, for example, one of the first and most frequent of the commandments, in the rabbinist's daily practice, DT (the washing of hands.) The command appears very simple. It says · "These are the impediments in human beings. The film that is outside the eye. The incrustation outside a wound. Dry blood that is on a wound. The plaster that is on it. Filth upon the flesh. The impurity or dirt under the nails. Dirt upon the body, mud, potter's clay, &c." (Ibid. c. ii. 1.) Every one of these can give rise to endless questions in casuistry, which are evidently beyond the powers of the unlearned, and must draw him, if he be a conscientious man, כל הנוטל ידיו צריך להזהר בארבעה דברי' • במים עצמן to the rabbi to solicit his advice. Thus, one | שלא יהיו פסולין לנטילת ידי' ובשיעור שיהיה בהן רביעי' of the very first commandments with which | לכל שתי ידים - ובכלי שיהיו המי' שנוטלין בהן בכלי • -the Jew begins the day, requires for its accu | ובנוטל שיהיו המים באין מכח נותן : "Every one who washes his hands must rate fulfilment a degree of knowledge which attend to four things. 1st, To the water, that it be not unlawful for the washing of hands. 2d, To the measure, that there be a quartern for the two hands. 3d, To the vessel, that the water, wherewith the washing is performed, be in a vessel. 4th, To the washer, that the water come with force from him that pours." (Hilchoth Berachoth vi. 6.) is far beyond the attainment of the multitude. whether it is possible for them to keep this one commandment. If they transgress any one of these rabbinic distinctions, their hands are not washed, and consequently they are unfit for prayer. But this is not a command through the day. washing altogether, and then have the ill luck to put his hands to his eyes, according to the oral law, blindness would be the consequence. Any neglect or defect in the morning ablution would be more fatal still. וידקדק לערות עליהן ג'פעמים מפני שרוח רעה שורה | for the morning only. It must be repeated על הידים קודם נטילה ואינו סרה עד שיערה עליהן שלש כל האוכל הפת שמברכין עליו המוציא צריך נטילת ידים פעמים • ועל כן צריך למנוע מהגיע בידו קודם נטילה שאין ע''פ לפה • ולחוטס: ולאזנים • ולעינים • מפני שרוח רעה תחלה וסוף • ואף על פי שהיא פת חולין ואף ידיו מלוכלכות ואינו יודע להן טומאה לא יאכל עד שיטול נטילת ירי' שתי ידיו • וכן כל דבר שטיבולו במשקין צריך שורה עליהם "Every one who eats that sort of bread, for which the benediction is, 'Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe! who bringeth forth bread from the earth," is bound to wash his hands at the beginning and end. And although the bread be common, and although his hands have not been defiled, and he is not aware of any uncleanness upon them, he is not to eat until he wash both his hands. And thus, also, with regard to any thing that is dipped in fluid, the washing of hands is necessary at the beginning." (Hilchoth Berachoth vi. 1.) Here, again, it is necessary to know the different sorts of bread, and the compounds that may be made with the different sorts of flour, and the various forms of benediction, and out of these again may arise as many doubts and questions as out of the former, for the solution of which learning, acuteness, and practice are required; and the want of these may lead to transgression, and, according to the rabbies, to most fatal consequences. For instance, neglect of this command after the meal may cause blindness. "A man must be very careful in pouring water on his hands three times, for an evil spirit rests upon the hands before washing, and does not depart until water be poured on Therefore it is necessary, them three times. before washing, to abstain from touching the hand to the mouth, and the nose, and the ears and the eyes, because an evil spirit rests upon them." (Orach Chaiim., §. 4.) Now, is this the religion of the God of love, and mercy, and justice? Is it at all like Him to give laws so subtle and multifarious in their distinctions, that it is next to impossible for the unlearned man to obey them aright, and then to attach to this non-observance such calamitous consequences? If it be replied that the punishment is visited only on those who transgress wilfully, then there are thousands of Jews, perhaps in this very city, who live in the habitual and wilful omission of this precept, and who have the use of their eyes, just as well as the strictest Rabbinist. This fact, which no one will dispute, proves beyond doubt, that the oral law has spoken falsehood, and therefore throws utter discredit upon its testimony respecting the tradition of the commandment itself. It is confessedly not a commandment from God, but from the Scribes. כל פת שהמלח בו צריך נטיל' ידים באחרונה שמא יש בו מלח סדומית או מלח שטבעו כמלח סדומית ויעביר כבר ביארנו שנטילת ידים וטבילתן מדברי סופרים • authority for the command is evident from the | מפני הסכנה * "All bread that has salt in it requires washing of hands after it; lest perhaps it might be the salt of Sodom, or salt of the same nature, and a man might pass his hand over his eyes and become blind. On this account all are bound to wash their hands at the end of every meal, because of the salt. But in a camp they are exempt from washing at the beginning, because they are oppressed with the fatigues of war, and are bound to wash after meal on account of the danger." (Ibid. 3.) Suppose, then, that a poor ignorant man, with the best intention in the world, set about this washing, and made a mistake with regard to the water, or the vessel, or the pouring, or the position of his hands; or suppose that a soldier, in the hurry of a camp, were to make this mistake, or omit the * Jewish prayer-book, p. 152. "We have explained long ago, that the washing and bathing of the hands are derived from the words of the Scribes." (Hilchoth Mikvaoth, xi. 1.) That they had no divine subtilty and superstition of its ordinances; for we presume that few will question the superstition of the threat of blindness to the disobedient, or of the fable of the evil spirit resting upon the hands. One such command, then, will go far to discredit the whole story of an oral law, and to invalidate the character of its witnesses. They were evidently superstitious men, no way elevated above the vulgar prejudices of the times, not at all scrupulous in adding to the law of God, and evidently aiming at a complete domination over the consciences of their followers. It is hardly possible to believe that they were not aware of the necessary result of the system, the complete subjugation of the consciences of the multitude. The mass of mankind has no leisure for the study of juristic distinctions, they must, therefore, if they believe such to be divine, cast themselves upon the mercy of the learned, and there can be no doubt that those who have the keys of salvation, will also possess no small degree of influence and power in this world. But, whatever was the motive, ing, like that of the Gentiles, to shave or to wear their hair like the other nations, and yet they say the transgression of this divine command is lawful under the following circumstances. ישראל שהיה קרוב למלכות וצריך לישב לפני מלכיהם there can be no doubt about the severity with והיה לו גנאי לפי שלא ידמה להן הרי זה מותר ללבוש | .which the rabbies enforced this command כמלבושיהן ולגלח כנגד פניו כדרך שהן עושין They exacted even from the poor unfortunate, whom circumstances left only enough water to slake his thirst, that he should sacrifice a part of it to this rabbinical purification. "An Israelite who is near to royalty, and is obliged to sit before Gentile kings, and for whom it would be disgraceful not to be like them, is allowed to dress and to shave as they do." (Hilchoth Accum., xi. 3.) But it is not to be wondered at, that those should lightly esteem the Word of God, who are capable of confounding the guilt of transgressing a mere human ceremony with the guilt of transgressing a divine command. The Talmud makes the sin of neglecting this command as great as that of gross immorality. כל האוכל לחם בלא נטיל' ידים כאילו בא על אישת זונה | וצרך ליזהר בנטילתם שכל המזלזל בנטילתם חייב נדוי . וכו' "It is necessary to be very careful in the washing of hands, for every one who despises the washing of hands is guilty of excommunication." (Orach Chaiim., §. 158.) And this same book confirms this decision by a case which actually occurred of a man thus excommunicated, and who dying in his excommunication had the usual indignities offered to his corpse. "Every one who eats bread without washing of hands, is as guilty as if he had committed fornication." (Sotah, fol. iv. col. 2.) The sum of all that has been said is, that the Scribes and Pharisees added a commandment not given by Moses, that they so refined upon the conditions of its fulfilment as to make it almost impossible for the unlearned not to transgress it, and yet denounced such את מי נדו את אלעזר בן חצר שפקפק בנטילת ידיי heavy penalties upon the transgressor as to | וכשמת שלזו בית דין והניחו אבן גדולה על ארונו ללמדך -make it an intolerable burden to the conscien שכל המתנדה ומת בנידויו ב"ד סולקין את ארונו "Whom did they excommunicate? Eleazar ben Chatzar, who despised the washing of hands; and when he was dead, the tribunal sent, and had a great stone laid on his coffin, to teach thee that of every one who is excommunicated and dies in his excommunication, the coffin is stoned by the tribunal." (Talmud. Berechoth, fol. 19, col. 1.) When they had the power they employed it to the full, and now that they have it not, the oral law still threatens poverty and extirpation to every transgressor. כל המזלזל בנטילת ידים בא לידי עניות : ואר' זריקא אמר ר' אלעזר כל המזלזל בנטילת ידים נעקר מן העולם • "Every one who despises washing of hands sinks into poverty. R. Zerika says in the name of R. Eliezer, Every one that despises the washing of hands is rooted out of the world." (Orach Chaiim., ibid.) Such is the toleration of the oral law towards Jews, accused of no breach of God's commandment, convicted of no denial of God's Word, guilty of no crime. And yet these same men, who are strict even to persecution about one of their own institutions, allow that which they consider the Word of God to be transgressed with impunity, if it be expedient. They assert their belief, that the law of Moses forbids the Jews to have cloth "Then tious; that when they had the power, they persecuted all that refused obedience, and did not scruple to pronounce the guilt of transgression as great as that of breaking one of the moral commandments. They have presented as the religion of Moses a system which is voluminous, superstitious, and intolerant; difficult to the comprehension of the unlearned, terrific to their consciences, and cruel to their persons. But when the poor were ground down and oppressed under this weight of superstition and tyranny, God sent them a deliverer in Jesus of Nazareth, who asserted the revealed truth of God, and protested against this mental bondage. came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the Scribes which came from Jerusalem. And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled (that is to say, with unwashen hands) they found fault.. He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.. And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you and understand: there is nothing from without a man that, entering into him, האדם יראה לעינים ויהוה יראה ללבב "Man looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart." (1 Sam. xvi. 7.) But the Scribes and Pharisees treated the Lord Jesus in the spirit of the laws which we have adduced above. They persecuted him unto death, and to the death He willingly went a martyr for the truth, and a sacrifice for the sin of the world. The authors of the oral law had but a short triumph. He rose from the dead, and his doctrine spread through the world, and everywhere announced freedom from the bondage of superstition as well as a hope of everlasting life. And the Jewish nation is at this hour enjoying the fruits of His death and doctrine in their liberty from rabbinic domination. Many of you now hold some of those principles, the assertion of which was the cause of His death. You believe that moral duties are far beyond cere. monial observances. You believe, many of you, that to eat with unwashen hands is no sin, and have given up the practice. You transgress this commandment of the Scribes, and yet you are not excommunicated nor persecuted. For all this you are indebted to Jesus of Nazareth. If the oral law had triumphed, and the doctrine of Jesus been silenced, you would still be living the victims of superstition or persecution. You would have been afraid of being struck with blindness, or haunted with an evil spirit, or even of being rooted out of the world. If a ray of divine light had visited your understanding, and you had protested against these traditions, you would have had to feel the weight of rabbinical persecution, like Jesus of Nazareth. You would have been excommucated like Eleazar, and if God had given you strength to remain faithful, would have died excommunicated, and have had a stone upon your coffin. How is it that now you are free, that you can think and act without any such fear? Is it because the Talmud has altered? No, it is just what it was. The conscientious believers in the Talmud are just the same as their fathers, and as conscientious men, if they had the power, they would think it their bounden duty to treat you, as their predecessors treated Eleazar. But the doctrine of Jesus of Nazareth delivers you, and the followers of Jesus of Nazareth are your protectors against the rigour of the oral law, and the intolerance of your brethren. Should not this fact, then, lead you to examine into the claims of that same Nazarene? How is it that if the principles of Jesus of Nazareth should ever become universal, the world will be universally happy; whereas if the principles of those who rejected him became universal, the whole world will groan under superstition and cruelty? What stronger testimony can there be to the justice of his claims, and the injustice of his condemnation? Examine, then, into, the other evidence, and in the meanwhile protest against the principles of the Talmud, and endeavour to deliver your brethren. There are multitudes of Jews who still groan under the superstitious laws respecting the washing of hands. In the book of daily prayer published here in London, the ordinance of washing of hands acknowledged as divine. On the 151st leaf, col. 2, you will find the following blessing : ברוך אתה יי אלהינו מלך העולם אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו על נטילת ידים "Blessed art thou, O Lord our God! King of the universe! who hath sanctified us with his commandments, and commanded us to cleanse our hands." Now this is a positive untruth, God has not given the commandment respecting the washing of hands. And yet here your prayer-book solemnly tells him that he has. And this prayer-book has also put a rubric to this benediction, "When the children wash their hands in the morning, they are taught to say the following blessing. From which it appears that the Jewish children in England are still taught to acknowledge the divine authority of the Talmud, for the only way in which that benediction can be defended, is by saying that the oral law is divine, and that its commandments were given by God. It is therefore a holy and imperative duty on all those Israelites who reject Talmudic superstition and intolerance to have this benediction erased from their prayer-book, and to preserve the children from the infection of that law which persecutes the living and insults the dead. London:-Sold at the London Society's Office, 16, Exeter-hall, Strand; by James Duncan, Paternosterrow; and B. Wertheim, 57, Aldersgate-street. This publication may be had by applying at No. 5, No. 7, or No. 13, Palestine-place, Bethnal green. |