*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 69170 ***

                              THE ESSENES:
                      THEIR HISTORY AND DOCTRINES.

                               AN ESSAY,
                    REPRINTED FROM THE TRANSACTIONS
                   OF THE LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL
                         SOCIETY OF LIVERPOOL.


                                   BY
                      CHRISTIAN D. GINSBURG, LL.D.


                                  ἑν παντὶ ἔθνει ὁ φοβούμενος αὐτὸν
                      καὶ ἐργαζόμενος δικαιοσύνην δεκτὸς αὐτῷ ἐστιν

                                                            Acts X, 35.


                                LONDON:
              LONGMAN, GREEN, LONGMAN, ROBERTS, AND GREEN.
                                 1864.








THE ESSENES.


I.


It is very surprising that the Essenes, whose exemplary Virtues
elicited the unbounded admiration of even the Greeks and Romans, and
whose doctrines and practices contributed so materially to the spread
of Christianity, should be so little known among intelligent
Christians. The current information upon this remarkable sect or order
of Judaism, to be found in ecclesiastical histories and Cyclopædias, is
derived from the short notices of Philo, Pliny, Josephus, Solinus,
Porphyry, Eusebius, and Epiphanius. These seven witnesses—of whom the
first and third are Jewish philosophers, the second, fourth and fifth
heathen writers, and the last two Christian church historians—are all
who, till within a very recent period, have been subpœnaed before the
tribunal of public opinion, to give evidence as to the character of
these very much misunderstood and neglected Essenes.

Not only is this combined testimony insufficient, but it is too much
tainted with the peculiar dogmas of the respective witnesses, to
furnish the general reader with an unbiassed notion of the character
and doctrines of this ancient sect. Philo and Josephus, writing in
Greek and in apology for their Jewish brethren, were too anxious to
represent to the Greeks and Romans every phase and sect of Judaism, as
corresponding to the different systems of Greek and Roman philosophy;
Pliny, Solinus, and Porphyry, again, betray too great an ignorance of
the inward workings of the Jewish religion, and too much prejudice
against the Jews; whilst Epiphanius draws upon his imagination, and
Eusebius simply copies the account of Philo, with the well-known
patristic pen. Nor can the modern descriptions of the Essenes, as given
in the histories of the church and in the popular Cyclopædias, be
always relied upon when they profess to give the results of the
aforementioned garbled scraps of ancient information; since the writers
are either too much afraid of, or too much pleased with, the marked
resemblance between some of the doctrines and practices of Christianity
and Essenism. Hence those who style themselves the true evangelical
Christians are very anxious to destroy every appearance of affinity
between Essenism and Christianity, lest it should be said that the one
gave rise to the other; whilst those who are termed Rationalists
multiply and magnify every feature of resemblance, in order to show
that Christianity is nothing but a development of Essenism—so that the
poor Essenes are crucified between the two.

The design of this essay is to give an impartial statement of the
doctrines and practices of the Essenes; to show their rise and
progress, their relationship both to Judaism and Christianity, their
numbers and localities, to trace the most probable signification of
their name, &c., &c. To do this, I not only appeal to the seven
stereotyped witnesses, but to the information upon this subject
scattered throughout the Midrashim and the Talmud. But not to incur the
charge of partiality, as well as to enable you to test my conclusions,
I have collected all that the ancients have written upon this subject,
and append to this paper the whole account which Philo, Pliny,
Josephus, Solinus, Porphyry, Eusebius, and Epiphanius give of the
Essenes.

The cardinal doctrines and practices of this sect are as follows:—They
regarded the inspired Law of God with the utmost veneration. In fact,
their adhesion to it was such that they were led thereby to pay the
greatest homage to Moses, the lawgiver, and to visit with capital
punishment any one of the brotherhood who blasphemed his name. The
highest aim of their life was to become the temples of the Holy Ghost,
when they could prophesy, perform miraculous cures, and, like Elias, be
the forerunners of the Messiah. This they regarded as the last stage of
perfection, which could only be reached by gradual growth in holiness,
brought about through strictly observing the commandments and the
Levitical laws of purity contained in the Pentateuch, mortifying the
flesh and the lusts thereof, and being meek and lowly in spirit,
inasmuch as this would bring them into closer communion with him who is
the Holy One of Israel. This earnest desire to avoid everything which
involved profanity in the slightest degree and which might interpose
between them and the Deity, made them abstain from using oaths, because
they regarded the invocation, in swearing, of heaven or the heavenly
throne, or anything which represents God’s glory, as a desecration.
Their communication was yea, yea; nay, nay; whatsoever was more than
these came of evil.

Their increased strictness in enforcing the observance of the rigid
Mosaic Jaws of Levitical purity, which were afterwards amplified and
rendered still more rigid by traditional explanations, [1] ultimately
compelled the Essenes to withdraw themselves altogether from the
society of their Jewish brethren, to form a separate community, and to
live apart from the world, since contact with any one who did not
practice these laws, or with anything belonging to such an one,
rendered them impure. This fear of coming in contact with that which is
impure, as well as the desire not to be hindered in their spiritual
communion with their Creator, also made the Essenes abstain from
marriage; inasmuch as women, according to the law, are subject to
perpetual pollutions in menstruum and child-birth (compare Lev. xii,
1–8; xv, 19–31), and as going to one’s wife, even under ordinary
circumstances, is regarded as defiling (vide infra, p. 39, note 19).
There were, however, some weak brethren who could not be like the
angels in heaven, neither marrying nor being given in marriage; these
were allowed to take wives, but they could never advance to the highest
orders of the brotherhood, and had, moreover, to observe laws specially
enacted for married brethren and sisters.

Here, in their separation from the Jewish nation, whatever any one of
them possessed was deposited in the general treasury, from which the
wants of the whole community alike were supplied by stewards appointed
by the whole brotherhood; so that they had all things in common. There
were no distinctions amongst them, such as rich and poor, masters and
servants; they called no one master upon earth, but all ministered to
the wants of one another. They lived peaceably with all men, reprobated
slavery and war, and would not even manufacture any martial instruments
whatever, however great the temptation or the fear might be. They were
governed by a president, who was elected by the whole body, and who
also acted as the judge of the community. Trials were conducted by
juries, composed, not as our juries are, of twelve persons, but of the
majority of the community, or of at least a hundred members, who had to
be unanimous in their verdict. The brother who was found guilty of
walking disorderly was excommunicated, yet was he not regarded as an
enemy, but was admonished as a brother, and received back after due
repentance.

As it was contrary to the laws of Levitical purity to buy anything from
one who did not practice those laws, the Essenes had to raise the
supplies of all their wants among themselves. In this they experienced
no difficulty, as their food and raiment were most simple and very
self-denying, and as each one of the community willingly took his share
of work in the department in which he most excelled. Some were engaged
in tilling the ground, some in tending flocks and rearing bees, some in
preparing food, some in making the articles of dress, some in healing
the sick, and some in instructing the young; whilst all of them devoted
certain hours to studying the mysteries of nature and revelation and of
the celestial hierarchy. They always got up before the sun rose, and
never talked about any worldly matters till they had all assembled
together and, with their faces turned towards the sun, offered up their
national hymn of praise (‏המאיר לארץ‎) for the renewal of the light of
the day. This done, every one betook himself to his work, according to
the directions of the overseers, and remained at it till the fifth hour
(or eleven o’clock, a.m.), when the labour of the forenoon regularly
terminated. All of them again assembled together, had a baptism in cold
water, put on their white garments, the symbol of purity, and then made
their way to the refectory, which they entered with as much solemnity
as if it were the temple. The meal was a common one; and each member
took his seat according to the order of age. Those of the brethren who
were the bakers and cooks then placed before each one a little loaf of
bread and a dish of the most simple food, consisting chiefly of
vegetables as they ate very little animal flesh, and the repast
commenced after the priest had invoked God’s blessing upon it. A
mysterious silence was observed during the meal, which had the
character of a sacrament, and may have been designed as a substitute
for the sacrifices which they refused to offer in the temple. The
priest concluded it by offering thanks to the Bountiful Supplier of all
our wants, which was the signal of dismissal. Hereupon all withdrew,
put off their white and sacred garments, and dressed themselves in
their working clothes, resumed their several employments which they had
to do according to the directions of the overseers till the evening,
when they assembled again to partake of a common meal. But though every
thing was done under the directions of the overseers, and the Essenes
had even to receive their presents through the stewards, yet in two
things they were at perfect liberty to act as they pleased, viz., they
could relieve the distressed with as much money as they thought proper,
and manifest their compassion for those who were not of the brotherhood
as much as they liked, and whenever they liked. Such was their manner
of life during the week days.

The Sabbath they observed with the utmost rigour, and regarded even the
removal of a vessel as labour, and a desecration of this holy day. On
this day they took special care not to be guilty of forsaking the
assembling of themselves together, as the manner of some is. Ten
persons constituted a complete and legal number for divine worship in
the synagogue, and in the presence of such an assembly an Essene would
never spit, nor would he at any time spit to his right hand. In the
synagogue, as at meals, each one took his seat according to age, in
becoming attire. They had no ordained ministers, whose exclusive right
it was to conduct the service; any one that liked took up the Bible and
read it, whilst another, who had much experience in spiritual matters,
expounded what was read. The distinctive ordinances of the brotherhood,
as well as the mysteries connected with the Tetragrammaton and the
angelic worlds were the prominent topics of Sabbatic instruction. Every
investigation into the causes of the phenomena both of mind and matter
was strictly forbidden, because the study of logic and metaphysics was
regarded as injurious to a devotional life.

Celibacy being the rule of Essenism, the ranks of the brotherhood had
to be filled up by recruits from the Jewish community at large. They
preferred taking children, whom they educated most carefully and taught
the practices of the order, believing that of such the kingdom of
heaven is best made up. Every grown-up candidate (ὁ ζηλῶν) had to pass
through a noviciate of two stages, which extended over three years,
before he could be finally admitted into the order. Upon entering the
first stage, which lasted twelve months, the novice (νεοσύστατος) had
to cast all his possessions into the common treasury. He then received
a copy of the regulations of the brotherhood (δίαιταν τοῦ τάγματος), as
well as a spade (σκαλίς ἁξινάριον = ‏יתד‎), to bury the excrement,
(comp. Deut. xxiii, 12–14,) an apron (περίζωμα = ‏זריז‎), used at the
lustrations, and a white robe (λευκὴν ἐσθῆτα = ‏בגד לבן‎) to put on at
meals, being the symbols of purity. During the whole of this period he
was an outsider, and was not admitted to the common meals, yet he had
to observe some of the ascetic rules of the Society. If, at the close
of this stage, the community found that he had properly acquitted
himself during the probationary year, the novice was admitted into the
second stage, which lasted two years, and was called an approacher
(προσίων ἔγγιον). During the period which lasted two years he was
admitted to a closer fellowship with the brotherhood, and shared in
their lustral rites (καθαρωτέρων πρὸς τῶν ἁγνείαν ὑδάτων μεταλαμβάνει),
but was still not admitted to the common meals (εἰς τὰς συμβιώσεις),
nor to any office. If he passed satisfactorily through the second stage
of probation, the approacher became an associate, or a full member of
the society (ὁμιλητὴς, ὃς εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον ἐγκρίνεται = ‏חבר‎), when he
was received into the brotherhood and partook of the common meal
(συμβιωτὴς).

Before, however, he was made a homiletes, or finally admitted into
close fellowship, he had to bind himself by a most solemn oath (this
being the only occasion on which the Essenes used an oath) to observe
three things. 1. Love to God. 2. Merciful justice towards all men;
especially to honor nobody as master, to avoid the wicked, to help the
righteous, to be faithful to every man, and especially to rulers (τοῖς
κρατοῦσιν), for without God no one comes to be ruler. And 3. Purity of
character, which implied humility, love of truth, hatred of falsehood,
strict secrecy towards outsiders, so as not to divulge the secret
doctrines (μυστήρια) to any one, and perfect openness with the members
of the order, and, finally, carefully to preserve the books belonging
to their sect (τὰ τῆς αἱρέσεως αὐτῶν βιβλία), and the names of the
angels (τὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων ὀνόματα) or the mysteries connected with the
Tetragrammaton (‏שם המפורש‎) and the other names of God and the angels,
comprised in the theosophy (‏מעשה מרכבה‎) as well as with the cosmogony
(‏מעשה בראשית‎) which also played so important a part among the Jewish
mystics and the Kabbalists.

The three sections consisting of candidate (ὁ ζηλῶν), approacher
(περουσιῶν ἔγγιον), and associate (ὁμιλητὴς, ὃς εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον
ἐγκρίνεται), were subdivided into four orders, distinguished from each
other by superior holiness. So marked and serious were these
distinctions, that if one belonging to a higher degree of purity
touched one who belonged to a lower order, i.e., if one of the fourth
or highest order came in contact with one of the third or lower order,
or if one of the third touched one of the second order, or if one of
the second order touched one of the first or lowest order, he
immediately became impure, and could only regain his purity by
lustrations. From the beginning of the noviciate to the achievement of
the highest spiritual state, there were eight different stages which
marked the gradual growth in holiness. Thus, after being accepted as a
novice and obtaining the apron (‏זריז‎—περίζωμα) the symbol of purity,
he attained (1) to the state of outward or bodily purity by baptisms
(‏זריזות מביאה לידי נקיות‎). From this state of bodily purity he
progressed (2) to that stage which imposed abstinence from connubial
intercourse (‏נקיות מביאה לידי פרישות‎), or to that degree of holiness,
which enabled him to practise celibacy. Having succeeded in mortifying
the flesh in this respect, he advanced (3) to the stage of inward or
spiritual purity (‏פרישות מביאה לידי טהרה‎). From this stage again he
advanced (4) to that which required the banishing of all anger and
malice, and the cultivation of a meek and lowly spirit (‏טהרה מביאה
לידי ענוה‎). This led him (5) to the culminating point of holiness
(‏ענוה מביאה לידי הסידות‎). Upon this summit of holiness he became (6)
the temple of the Holy Spirit, and could prophesy (‏חסידות מביה לידי
רה״ק‎). Thence again he advanced (7) to that stage in which he was
enabled to perform miraculous cures, and raise the dead (‏רוח הקדש לידי
תחה״מ‎). And finally, he attained (8) to the position of Elias the
forerunner of the Messiah (‏תחה״מ לידי אליהו‎).

The earnestness and determination of these Essenes to advance to the
highest state of holiness were seen in their self-denying and godly
life; and it may fairly be questioned whether any religious system has
ever produced such a community of saints. Their absolute confidence in
God and resignation to the dealings of Providence; their uniformly holy
and unselfish life; their unbounded love of virtue, and utter contempt
for worldly fame, riches or pleasure; their industry, temperance,
modesty and simplicity of life; their contentment of mind and
cheerfulness of temper; their love of order, and abhorrence of even the
semblance of falsehood; their benevolence and philanthropy; their love
for the brethren, and their following peace with all men; their hatred
of slavery and war; their tender regard for children, and reverence and
anxious care for the aged; their attendance on the sick, and readiness
to relieve the distressed; their humility and magnanimity; their
firmness of character and power to subdue their passions; their heroic
endurance under the most agonizing sufferings for righteousness’ sake;
and their cheerfully looking forward to death, as releasing their
immortal souls from the bonds of the body to be for ever in a state of
bliss with their Creator—have hardly found a parallel in the history of
mankind. No wonder that Jews, of different sects, Greeks and Romans,
Christian church historians, and heathen writers have been alike
constrained to lavish the most unqualified praise on this holy
brotherhood. It seems that the Saviour of the world, who illustrated
simplicity and innocence of character by the little child which he took
up in his arms, also showed what is required for a holy life in the
Sermon on the Mount by a description of the Essenes. So remarkably does
this brotherhood exemplify the lessons which Christ propounds in Matth.
chap v., &c.

This leads us to consider the question about the origin of this
brotherhood, and their relationship to Judaism and Christianity. The
assertion of Josephus that they “live the same kind of life which among
the Greeks has been ordered by Pythagoras” (vide infra, p. 226, § 4,)
has led some writers to believe that Essenism is the offspring of
Pythagorism. The most able champion for this view is Zeller, the author
of the celebrated History of Philosophy. He maintains [2] “that
Essenism, at least as we know it from Philo and Josephus, has, in its
essence, originated under Greek and especially under Pythagorean
influences,” and tries to support his conclusion by the following
summary of the supposed resemblances between Neo-Pythagorism and
Essenism. (1) “Both strive to attain to superior holiness by an ascetic
life. (2) Both repudiate animal sacrifices, the eating of animal food,
wine and marriage. (3) Both of them are, however, not quite agreed
among themselves about the latter point; for on both sides there are
some who recommend marriage, but restrict connubial intercourse to
procreation. (4) Moreover, both demand simplicity of life. (5) Both
refrain from warm baths. (6) Both wear white garments, especially at
dinner time. (7) Both lay the greatest value upon their purification
and eschew everything unclean. (8) Both prohibit oaths, because a pious
man does not require them. (9) Both find their social ideal in
institutions which it is true were only realized by the Essenes, and in
living together with perfect community of goods and unconditional
subordination of individuals to their overseers. (10) Both insist on
strict secresy about their schools. (11) Both like symbolic
representations of their doctrines. (12) Both support themselves on an
allegorical interpretation of ancient traditions, whose authority they
recognise (13) Both worship higher powers in the elements, and pray to
the rising sun. (14) Both seek to keep everything unclean from their
sight, and for this reason have peculiar prescriptions about the
discharge of the duties of nature. (15) Both cultivate the belief in
intermediate beings between the supreme Deity and the world. (16) Both
devote themselves to magic arts. (17) Both regard above all things the
gift of prophesy as the highest fruit of wisdom and piety, and both
boast to possess this gift in their most distinguished members. (18)
Finally, Both corroborate their peculiar mode of life with a dualistic
view of the relation of the spirit and matter, good and evil. (19) Both
agree especially in their notions about the origin of the soul, its
relationship to the body, and about a future life, only the doctrine of
transmigration of souls seems not to have been known among the Essenes”
[3]

Striking as these resemblances may appear, it will be seen on a closer
examination that some of the points which constitute this comparison do
not exist in Essenism, that others are either due to the coloring of
Josephus or have their origin in Judaism, that the difference between
Pythagorism and Essenism are far more numerous and vital than the
parallels, and that Zeller’s conclusion is therefore not warranted. I
shall examine these points seriatim.

(1) Asceticism is not foreign to Judaism. We meet with individuals who
voluntarily imposed upon themselves ascetic life to be able, as they
thought, to give themselves more entirely to the service of God by
mortifying the lusts of the flesh, at a very early period of Biblical
history; and we need only to refer to the regulations about Nazarites
(Numb. vi. 1–21), to the case of Manoah and his wife (Judg. xiii.), to
the life of Elijah (1 Kings xviii.–xix.) to the practices of the
Rechabites throughout the Scriptures, of persons abstaining from the
good things of this world, to see how the Essenes, without (Jer. xxxv.
2, &c.), and to the numerous instances which occur copying the
Pythagoreans or any other heathen fraternity, would naturally conclude
that asceticism is conducive to a devotional life. (2) As to the
repudiation of animal sacrifice, animal food, wine, &c, to which Zeller
refers in the second point of comparison, I submit that the Essenes did
not repudiate animal sacrifices, but that they could not offer them on
account of the different view which they had about holiness, as
Josephus most distinctly declares (vide infra p. 52), that neither
Philo nor Josephus says a word about their objecting to eat animal
flesh or drink wine, and that their celibacy arose from an extension of
a law contained in the Pentateuch. Besides, it is not quite so certain
that the Pythagoreans did not offer animal sacrifices; Diogenes
Laertius and others positively state that Pythagoras himself sacrificed
a hecatomb upon his discovering what is called the Pythagoric theorem,
i.e. that, in a right angled triangle, the square of the hypothenuse is
equal to the sum of the squares of the sides. [4] (4) The fourth
comparison about simplicity of life is involved in the first. (5) The
statement in the fifth comparison, that the Essenes refrain from warm
baths, is purely imaginary; (6, 7) whilst the white garments and the
purifications mentioned in the sixth and seventh parallels are strictly
Jewish and Biblical. As symbolic of purity the priests were required to
clothe themselves in white linen (Exod. xxviii. 39–42; Levit. vi. 10;
xvi. 4), and the saints in heaven, washed and cleansed from all
impurity, are to be clad in white garments (4 Esdras ii. 39–45; Enoch
lxi. 18; Rev. iii. 4; vi. 11; vii. 9, 14; xix. 8); soiled garments are
regarded as emblematic of impurity (Zech. iii. 3, &c.) Inseparably
connected therewith are the frequent purifications or washings enjoined
on the priests before entering into the presence of God to perform
religious acts (Levit. xvi. 4; 2 Chron. xxx. 19), and on the people
generally after coming in contact with anything impure (Levit. xi. 25,
40; xv. 5–24). The white garments and the frequent purifications of the
Essenes, who strove to live after the highest degree of Levitical
purity, were therefore in perfect harmony with exaggerated Judaism. (8)
As to the assertion in comparison 8 that the Pythagoreans prohibited
oaths, it is well known that they did use oaths on important occasions,
and that they held it to be most sacred to swear by the number four,
which they represented by ten dots in the form of a triangle, so that
each side consisted of four dots, as follows:—


                                •
                              •   •
                            •   •   •
                          •   •   •   •


The community of goods, the secresy about their institutions, the
symbolic representation of their doctrines, &c., mentioned in
comparisons 9, 10, 11, 12, are the natural result of their manner of
life. (13) That they worshipped the sun is not borne out by fact, (14)
whilst their peculiar manner in performing the functions of nature is
in accordance with the injunction of Scripture (Deut. xxiii. 13, 15),
which the Essenes, as the spiritual host of the Lord, applied to
themselves. (15) As to their very peculiar belief in intermediate
beings between the Deity and the world, mentioned in the fifteenth
point of comparison, I can only say that Philo and Josephus say nothing
about it. (16) Their devotedness to the study of the magic arts was
restricted to miraculous cures, and was not peculiar to them; since
tradition had made Solomon the author of books on magical cures and
exorcisms, and Josephus tells us (vide infra, p. 44, note 35) that he
had seen other Jews performing these magic cures. (17) Neither is there
anything foreign in the opinion, that the power to foretel future
events can only be obtained by leading a life of preeminent holiness,
for this was the common belief of the Jews, though it is true that the
Essenes were the only section of the Jewish community who as a body
strove to obtain the gift of prophecy. It, however, must not be
forgotten that others too laid claim to this gift. Josephus tells us
that when brought as prisoner of war before Vespasian, he addressed the
Roman general as follows:—“Thou, Vespasian thinkest that thou hast
simply a prisoner of war in me, but I appear before thee as a prophet
of important future events. If I had not to deliver to thee a message
from God, I would have known what the Jewish law demands, and how a
general ought to die. Dost thou want to send me to Nero? For what? Will
his successors, who ascend the throne before thee, reign long on it?
No! thou, Vespasian, wilt be emperor and autocrat—thou, and this thy
son.” (Jewish War, iii. 8, § 9). This prophecy of Josephus is also
recorded by the celebrated Roman historian Dion Cassius who says:
“Josephus, a Jew, was taken prisoner by him (i.e. Vespasian), and put
in chains; but he smilingly addressed him: ‘Thou puttest me now in
chains, but thou wilt loose them again, after twelve months, as
emperor’” (lib. lxvi. c. 1); and by Tacitus (lib. v. c. 13). What
Zeller says in comparisons 18 and 19 about their dualistic view of the
relationship of spirit and matter, good and evil, and their notions of
the origin of the soul, is entirely owing to Josephus’ colouring of the
subject, as may be seen from the notes on the extracts from this
historian in the second part of this Essay.

Having thus shown that the parallels between Pythagorism and Essenism
are more imaginary than real, and that the few things which might be
considered as being analogous are unimportant, and are such as will
naturally develop themselves among any number of enlightened men who
devote themselves almost exclusively to a contemplative religious life,
I shall now point out some of the vital differences between the two
brotherhoods. 1. The Pythagoreans were essentially polytheists; the
Essenes were real monotheistic Jews, worshippers of the Holy One of
Israel. 2. The Pythagoreans clustered round Pythagoras as the centre of
their spiritual and intellectual life, and estimated the degree of
perfection of any of the members by the degree of intimacy which he
enjoyed with Pythagoras: the Essenes regarded the inspired Scriptures
as their sole source of spiritual life, and called no man master on
earth, every one having the same right to teach, and being alike
eligible for all the offices in the commonwealth. 3. The Pythagoreans
favored matrimony, and we are told that Pythagoras himself had a wife
and children; whilst celibacy was the rule of Essenism, marriage being
the exception. 4. The Pythagoreans believed in the doctrine of
metempsychosis, which led them to abstain from eating animal flesh,
because human souls migrated into animals, and made Pythagoras once
intercede in behalf of a dog that was being beaten, because he
recognised in its cries the voice of a departed friend: the Essenes
believed no such thing. 5. Scientific studies, such as mathematics,
astronomy, music, &c, formed an essential part of the Pythagorean
system: Essenism strictly forbade these studies as injurious to a
devotional life. 6. Pythagorism was occupied with instigating the
problems of the origin and constitution of the universe: Essenism
regarded such inquiries as impious, and most implicitly looked upon God
as the creator of all things. 7. Pythagorism taught that man can
control his fortune and overrule his circumstances: Essenism maintained
that fate governs all things, and that nothing can befal man contrary
to its determination and will. 8. Pythagorism enjoined ointment to be
used by its followers: the Essenes regarded it as defilement 9. The
Pythagoreans had a sovereign contempt for all those who did not belong
to their ranks: the Essenes were most exemplary in their charity
towards all men, and in their unbounded kindness to those who were not
of the brotherhood. 10. The Pythagoreans were an aristocratical and
exclusive club, and excited the jealousy and hatred not only of the
democratical party in Crotona, but also of a considerable number of the
opposite faction, so much so that it speedily led to their destruction:
the Essenes were meek and lowly in spirit, and were so much beloved by
those who belonged to different sects, that Pharisees and Sadducees,
Greeks and Romans, Jews and Gentiles, joined in lavishing the highest
praise upon them. [5]

As to the relationship which Essenism bears to Judaism, the very fact
that the Essenes, like the other Jews, professed to he guided by the
teachings of the Bible, and that a rupture between them and the Jewish
community at large is nowhere mentioned, but that on the contrary they
are always spoken of in the highest terms of commendation, would of
itself be sufficient to prove it. In doctrine, as well as in practice,
the Essenes and the Pharisees were nearly alike. Both had four classes
of Levitical purity, which were so marked that one who lived according
to the higher degree of purity, became impure by touching one who
practised a lower degree, and could only regain his purity by
lustration. Both subjected every applicant for membership to a
noviciate of twelve months. Both gave their novices an apron in the
first year of their probation. Both refused to propound the mysteries
of the cosmogony and cosmology to any one except to members of the
society. Both had stewards in every place where they resided to supply
the needy strangers of their order with articles of clothing and food.
Both regarded office as coming from God. Both looked upon their meal as
a sacrament. Both bathed before sitting down to the meal. Both wore a
symbolic garment on the lower part of the body whilst bathing. Amongst
both the priest began and concluded the meal with prayer. Both regarded
ten persons as constituting a complete number for divine worship, and
held the assembly of such a number as sacred. Amongst both of them none
would spit to the right hand in the presence of such an assembly. Both
washed after performing the functions of nature. Both would not remove
a vessel on the Sabbath. And both abstained from using oaths, though it
is true that the Essenes alone uniformly observed it as a sacred
principle. The differences between the Essenes and the Pharisees are
such as would naturally develope themselves in the course of time from
the extreme rigour with which the former sought to practise the
Levitical laws of purity. As contact with any one or with anything
belonging to any one who did not live according to the same degree of
purity, rendered them impure according to the strict application of
their laws, the Essenes were in the first place obliged to withdraw
from intercourse with their other Jewish brethren, and form themselves
into a separate brotherhood. Accordingly the first difference between
them and the others was that they formed an isolated order. The second
point of difference was on marriage. The Pharisees regarded marriage as
a most sacred institution, and laid it down as a rule that every man is
to take a wife at the age of eighteen (Comp. Aboth v. 21), whilst the
Essenes were celibates, which, as we have seen before, also arose from
their anxiety to avoid defilement. Hence the declaration in Aboth d. R.
Nathan—“there are eight kinds of Pharisees; ... and those Pharisees who
live in celibacy are Essenes” (c. xxxvii.). [6] The third difference
which existed between them and the Pharisees, and which was also owing
to the rigorous application of the Levitical laws of purity, was that
they did not frequent the temple and would not offer sacrifices. And
fourthly, though they firmly believed in the immortality of the soul,
yet, unlike the Pharisees, they did not believe in the resurrection of
the body.

The identity of many of the precepts and practices of Essenism and
Christianity is unquestionable. Essenism urged on its disciples to seek
first the kingdom of God and his righteousness: so Christ (Matt. vi.
33; Luke xii. 31). The Essenes forbade the laying up of treasures upon
earth: so Christ (Matt. vi. 19–21). The Essenes demanded of those who
wished to join them to sell all their possessions, and to divide it
among the poor brethren: so Christ (Matt. xix. 21; Luke xii. 33). The
Essenes had all things in common, and appointed one of the brethren as
steward to manage the common bag; so the primitive Christians (Acts ii.
44, 45; iv. 32–34; John xii. 6; xiii. 29). Essenism put all its members
on the same level, forbidding the exercise of authority of one over the
other, and enjoining mutual service; so Christ (Matt. xx. 25–28; Mark
ix. 35–37; x. 42–45). Essenism commanded its disciples to call no man
master upon the earth; so Christ (Matt. xxiii. 8–10). Essenism laid the
greatest stress on being meek and lowly in spirit; so Christ (Matt. v.
5; xi. 29). Christ commended the poor in spirit, those who hunger and
thirst after righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, and the
peacemakers; so the Essenes. Christ combined the healing of the body
with that of the soul; so the Essenes. Like the Essenes, Christ
declared that the power to cast out evil spirits, to perform miraculous
cures, &c., should be possessed by his disciples as signs of their
belief (Mark xvi. 17; comp. also Matt. x. 8; Luke ix. 1, 2; x. 9). Like
the Essenes, Christ commanded his disciples not to swear at all, but to
say yea, yea, and nay, nay. The manner in which Christ directed his
disciples to go on their journey (Matt. x. 9, 10) is the same which the
Essenes adopted when they started on a mission of mercy. The Essenes,
though repudiating offensive war, yet took weapons with them when they
went on a perilous journey; Christ enjoined his disciples to do the
same thing (Luke xxii. 36). Christ commended that elevated spiritual
life, which enables a man to abstain from marriage for the kingdom of
heaven’s sake, and which cannot be attained by all men save those to
whom it is given (Matt. xix. 10–12; comp. also 1 Cor. viii.); so the
Essenes who, as a body, in waiting for the kingdom of heaven (‏מלכות
השמים‎) abstained from connubial intercourse. The Essenes did not offer
animal sacrifices, but strove to present their bodies a living
sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, which they regarded as a
reasonable service; the Apostle Paul exhorts the Romans to do the same.
(Rom. xii. 1). It was the great aim of the Essenes to live such a life
of purity and holiness as to be the temples of the Holy Spirit, and to
be able to prophesy: the apostle Paul urges the Corinthians to covet to
prophesy (1 Cor. xiv. 1, 39). When Christ pronounced John to be Elias
(Matt. xi. 14), he declared that the Baptist had already attained to
that spirit and power which the Essenes strove to obtain in their
highest stage of purity. [7] It will therefore hardly be doubted that
our Saviour himself belonged to this holy brotherhood. This will
especially be apparent when we remember that the whole Jewish
community, at the advent of Christ, was divided into three parties, the
Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Essenes, and that every Jew had to
belong to one of these sects. Jesus who, in all things, conformed to
the Jewish law, and who was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate
from sinners, would therefore naturally associate himself with that
order of Judaism which was most congenial to his holy nature. Moreover,
the fact that Christ, with the exception of once, was not heard of in
public till his thirtieth year, implying that he lived in seclusion
with this fraternity, and that though he frequently rebuked the
Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees, he never denounced the Essenes,
strongly confirms this conclusion. There can be no difficulty in
admitting that the Saviour of the world, who taught us lessons from the
sparrows in the air, and the lilies in the field, and who made the
whole realm of nature tributary to his teachings, would commend divine
truth wherever it existed. But whilst Christ propounded some of the
everlasting truths which were to be found less adulterated and
practised more conscientiously among the Essenes than among the rest of
the people, he repudiated their extremes. They were ascetics; he ate
and drank the good things of God (Matt., xi. 19). They considered
themselves defiled by contact with any one who practised a lower degree
of holiness than their own; Christ associated with publicans and
sinners, to teach them the way to heaven. They sacrificed the lusts of
their flesh to gain spiritual happiness for themselves; Christ
sacrificed himself for the salvation of others.

It is now impossible to ascertain the precise date when this order of
Judaism first developed itself. According to Philo, Moses himself
instituted this order; Josephus contents himself with saying that they
existed “ever since the ancient time of the fathers;” whilst Pliny
assures us that, without any one being born among them, the Essenes,
incredible to relate, “have prolonged their existence for thousands of
ages.” [8] Bating, however, these assertions, which are quite in
harmony with the well known ancient custom of ascribing some
pre-Adamite period to every religious or philosophical system, it must
already have become apparent, from the description of it, that the very
nature of the Essenes precludes the possibility of tracing its date.
The fact that the Essenes developed themselves gradually, and at first
imperceptibly, through intensifying the prevalent religious notions,
renders it impossible to say with exactness at what degree of intensity
they are to be considered as detached from the general body. The first
mention we have of their existence is in the days of Jonathan the
Maccabæan, B.C. 166. (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 5, 8). We then hear of them
again in the reign of Aristobulus I., B.C. 106, in connection with a
prophecy about the death of Antigonus, uttered by Judas an Essene, of
which Josephus gives the following account. “Judas, an Essene, whose
predictions had up to this time never deceived, caused great
astonishment on this occasion. When he saw at that time Antigonus pass
through the temple, he called out to his disciples, of whom he had no
small number—‘Oh! it would be better for me to die now, since truth
died before me, and one of my prophecies has proved false. Antigonus,
who ought to have died this day, is alive; Strato’s Tower, which is six
hundred furlongs distance from here, is fixed for his murder, and it is
already the fourth hour of the day [ten o’clock]; time condemns the
prophecy as a falsehood.’ Having uttered these words, the aged man sunk
into a long, dejected, and sorrowing silence. Soon after, the report
came that Antigonus was murdered in the subterranean passage which,
like Cesarea on the sea side, was also called Strato’s Tower. It was
this circumstance that misled the prophet.” (Jewish War, i. 3, § 5;
Antiq. xiii. 11, § 2). The third mention of their existence we find in
the well known prophecy of the Essene Manahem, uttered to Herod when a
boy. [9] Now these accounts most unquestionably show that the Essenes
existed at least two centuries before the Christian era, and that they
at first lived amongst the Jewish community at large. Their residence
at Jerusalem is also evident from the fact that there was a gate named
after them (Ἐσσηνῶν πύλη Joseph. Jewish War, v. 4, § 2). When they
ultimately withdrew themselves from the rest of the Jewish nation, the
majority of them settled on the north-west shore of the Dead Sea,
sufficiently distant to escape its noxious exhalations, and the rest
lived in scattered communities throughout Palestine and Syria. Both
Philo and Josephus estimated them to be above four thousand in number.
This must have been exclusive of women and children. We hear very
little of them after this period (i.e. 40 A.D.); and there can hardly
be any doubt that, owing to the great similarity which existed between
their precepts and practices and those of the primitive Christians, the
Essenes as a body must have embraced Christianity.

Having ascertained the character of the Essenes, we shall be better
prepared to investigate the origin of their name, which has been the
cause of so much controversy, and which was not known even to Philo and
Josephus. There is hardly an expression the etymology of which has
called forth such a diversity of opinion as this name has elicited. The
Greek and the Hebrew, the Syriac and the Chaldee, names of persons and
names of places, have successively been tortured to confess the secret
connected with this appellation, and there are no less, if not more,
than twenty different explanations of it, which I shall give in
chronological order. Philo tells us that some derived it from the Greek
homonym ὁσιότης holiness, because the Essenes were above all others
worshippers of God; but he rejects it as incorrect (vide infra, p. 32)
without giving us another derivation. 2. Josephus does not expressly
give any derivation of it, but simply says, “the third sect who really
seem to practise holiness (ὁ δὴ καὶ δοκεῖ σεμνότητα ἀσκεῖν) are called
Essenes.” (Vide infra p. 41). From the addition, however, “who really
seem to practise holiness or piety,” Frankel [10] argues that the word
must mean holiness or piety, because it appears to justify the name,
and hence concludes that Josephus most probably took it to be the
Hebrew ‏חסידים‎ or ‏צנועים‎. Whilst Jost [11] is of opinion that
Josephus derived it from the Chaldee ‏חשא‎ to be silent, to be
mysterious, because ‏חשן‎ the high priest’s breast-plate, for which the
Septuagint has λογεῖον or λόγιον is translated by him ἐσσην, or that he
might have deduced this idea from ‏חשן‎ itself, and traced it to
λογεῖον or λόγιον as endowed with the gift of prophecy. [12] In Aboth
of R. Nathan [13] it is written ‏עשאני‎ from ‏עשה‎ to do, to perform,
and accordingly denotes the performers of the law. 4. Epiphanius again
calls them Ὀσσαῖοι and Ὀσσηνοι and tells us that it etymologically
signifies στιβαρὸν γένος the stout or strong race, evidently taking it
for ‏חסין‎ or ‏עזים‎. 5. In another place Epiphanius affirms that the
Essenes borrowed their name from Jesse the father of David, or from
Jesus, whose doctrines he ascribes to them; explaining the name Jesus
to signify in Hebrew a physician; and calls them Jesseans. [14] In this
he is followed by Petitus who makes them so related to David that they
were obliged to take the name of his father Jesus or Jesse; [15]
although Jesus does not signify physician but God-help. 6. Suidas (Lex
s. v.) and Hilgenfeld (Die jüdische Apokal. p. 278), make it out to be
the form ‏חזין‎ = θεωρητικοί seers, and the latter maintains that this
name was given to them because they pretended to see visions and to
prophesy. 7. Josippon b. Gorion [16] (lib. iv. sects. 6, 7, p.p. 274
and 278, ed. Breithaupt), and Gale (Court of the Gentiles, part ii., p.
147), take it for the Hebrew ‏חסידים‎ the pious, the puritans. 8. De
Rossi [17] (Meor Enaim, 82 a), Gfrörer (Philo, ii. p. 341), Herzfeld
(Geschichte d. V. Israel ii. p. 397), and others, insist that it is the
Aramaic ‏אסיא‎ = θεραπευτής physician, and that this name was given to
them because of the spiritual or physical cures they performed. Indeed,
De Rossi and Herzfeld will have it that the sect Baithusians ‏ביתוסים‎
mentioned in the Talmud is nothing but a contraction of ‏בית אסי‎ the
school or sect of physicians, just as ‏בית הילל‎ stands for the school
of Hillel. 9. Salmasius affirms that the Essenes derived their name
from the town called Essa, situated beyond the Jordan, which is
mentioned by Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 15, § 2), or from the place Vadi
Ossis. [18] 10. Rappaport (Erech Milln, p. 41), says that it is the
Greek ἰσος an associate, a fellow of the fraternity. 11. Frankel
(Zeitschrift, 1846, p. 449, &c.), and others think that it is the
Hebrew expression ‏צנועים‎ the retired. 12. Ewald (Geschichte d. Volkes
Israel, iv. p. 420), is sure that it is the Rabbinic ‏חזן‎ servant (of
God), and that the name was given to them because it was their only
desire to be θεραπευταὶ θεοῦ. 13. Graetz (Geschichte der Juden iii. p.
468, second ed.) will have it that it is from the Aramaic ‏סחא‎ to
bathe, with Aleph prostheticum, and that it is the shorter form for
‏אסחאי צפרא‎ = ‏טובלי שחרית‎ ἡμιερβαπτισταί hemerobaptists; the Greek
form Ἐσσαῖος, Ἐσσαῖοι being nothing but Assaï or Essaï with ‏ח‎ elided.
14. Dr. Löw (Ben Chananja vol. i. p. 352) never doubts but that they
were called Essenes after their founder, whose name he tells us was
‏ישי‎, the disciple of Rabbi Joshua ben Perachja. 15. Dr. Adler
(Volkslehrer, vi. p. 50), again submits that it is from the Hebrew
‏אסר‎ to bind together, to associate, and that they were called ‏אסרים‎
because they united together to keep the law. 16. Dr. Cohen suggests
the Chaldee root ‏עשן‎ to be strong, and that they were called ‏עשיני‎
because of their strength of mind to endure sufferings and to subdue
their passions. (Comp. Frankel’s Monatschrift viii. p. 272). 17.
Oppenheim thinks that it may be the form ‏עושין‎ and stand for ‏עושין
טהרת הקדש‎ or ‏עושין טהרת חטאת‎ observers of the laws of purity and
holiness. (Ibid). 18. Jellinek (Ben Chananja iv. 374), again derives it
from the Hebrew ‏חצן‎ sinus, περίζωμα, alluding to the apron which the
Essenes wore; whilst, 19, Others again derived it from ‏חסיא‎ pious.
The two last-mentioned explanations seem to have much to recommend
them, they are natural and expressive of the characteristics of the
brotherhood. I, however, incline to prefer the last, because it plainly
connects the Essenes with an ancient Jewish brotherhood called
Chassidim ‏חסידים‎ the pious, who preceded the Essenes, and from whom
the latter took their rise. Those who wish to trace this connection,
will find an article on the Chassidim in Dr. Alexander’s edition of
Kitto’s Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature.








II.


I shall now give in chronological order the description of the Essenes
found in the writings of Philo, Pliny, Josephus, Solinus, Porphyry,
Eusebius and Epiphanius, and subjoin such notes as will explain the
difficulties, and show the historical value of the respective
documents.

As Philo is the oldest in point of time, we will begin with him. The
exact date of the birth of this celebrated Jewish-Alexandrian
philosopher is not known. It is, however, generally agreed that he was
born in Alexandria between the years 20 and 1 B.C., and died about 60
A.D. Having resided all his lifetime in Alexandria, his information
about the Essenes, who lived in Palestine, was derived from hearsay.
This will account for some of the inaccuracies in his description of
this remarkable brotherhood. He has given us two accounts of them, one
in his treatise, entitled Every Virtuous Man is Free, and the other in
his treatise, called Apology for the Jews. The latter is no longer
extant, but Eusebius has preserved the fragments which speak of the
Essenes in his work, entitled Præparatio Evangelica viii. 11. The
description of the so-called contemplative Essenes, or Therapeutæ,
which is generally appealed to as illustrating the doctrines and
practices of the brotherhood in question, has nothing whatever to do
with the real Palestinian Essenes; and it is almost certain that it is
one of the many apocryphal productions fathered upon Philo, as may be
seen from Graetz’s elaborate and masterly analysis of it. [19] Philo’s
first account is contained in his treatise entitled Every Virtuous Man
is Free, and is as follows: [20]

“Palestine, and Syria too, which are inhabited by no slight portion of
the numerous population of the Jews, are not barren of virtue. There
are some among them called Essenes (Ἐσσαῖοι),—in number more than four
thousand,—from, as I think, an incorrect derivation from the Greek
homonym hosiotes, holiness (παρώνυμοι ὁσιότητος), because they are
above all others worshippers of God (θεραπευταὶ θεοῦ). They do not
sacrifice any animate, but rather endeavour to make their own minds fit
for holy offering (ἱεροπρεπεῖς διανοίας). [21] They, in the first
place, live in villages, avoiding cities on account of the habitual
wickedness of the citizens, being sensible that as disease is
contracted from breathing an impure atmosphere, so an incurable
impression is made on the soul in such evil company. [22] Some of them
cultivate the earth, others are engaged in those diverse arts which
promote peace, thus benefiting themselves and their neighbours. They do
not lay up treasures of gold or silver, [23] nor do they acquire large
portions of land out of a desire for revenues, but provide themselves
only with the absolute necessities of life. Although they are almost
the only persons of all mankind who are without wealth and
possessions—and this by their own choice rather than want of
success—yet they regard themselves as the richest, because they hold
that the supply of our wants, and contentment of mind, are riches, as
in truth they are. [24]

“No maker of arrows, darts, spears, swords, helmets, breastplates, or
shields—no manufacturer of arms or engines of war, nor any man whatever
who makes things belonging to war, or even such things as might lead to
wickedness in times of peace, is to be found among them. [25] Traffic,
innkeeping, or navigation, they never so much as dream of, because they
repudiate every inducement to covetousness. There is not a single slave
to be found among them, for all are free, and mutually serve each
other. They condemn owners of slaves, not only as unjust, inasmuch as
they corrupt the principle of equality, but also as impious, because
they destroy the law of nature, which like a mother brought forth and
nourished all alike, and made them all legitimate brethren, not only in
word but in deed; but this relationship, treacherous covetousness,
rendered overbearing by success, has destroyed by engendering enmity
instead of cordiality, and hatred instead of love.

“They leave the logical part of philosophy, as in no respect necessary
for the acquisition of virtue, to the word catchers; and the natural
part, as being too difficult for human nature, to the astrological
babblers, excepting that part of it which treats upon the existence of
God and the origin of the universe; [26] but the ethical part they
thoroughly work out themselves, using as their guides the laws which
their fathers inherited, and which it would have been impossible for
the human mind to devise without divine inspiration. Herein they
instruct themselves at all times, but more especially on the seventh
day. For the seventh day is held holy, on which they abstain from all
other work, and go to the sacred places called synagogues, sit
according to order, the younger below the elder, and listen with
becoming attention. Then one takes the Bible and reads it, and another
of those who have most experience comes forward and expounds it,
passing over that which is not generally known, for they philosophise
on most things in symbols according to the ancient zeal.

“They are instructed in piety, holiness, righteousness, economy,
politics, in knowledge of what is truly good, bad and indifferent, to
choose things that are necessary, and to avoid the contrary. They use
therein a threefold rule and definition, viz.: love of God, love of
virtue, and love of mankind. [27] Of their love to God, they give
innumerable demonstrations—e.g. their constant and unalterable holiness
(ἁγνεία) throughout the whole of their life; their avoidance of oaths
[28] and falsehoods, and their firm belief that God is the source of
all good, but of nothing evil. Of their love of virtue they give proofs
in their contempt for money, fame, and pleasures, their continence,
endurance, in their satisfying their wants easily, simplicity,
cheerfulness of temper, modesty, order, firmness, and every thing of
the kind. As instances of their love to man, are to be mentioned, their
benevolence, equality, and their having all things in common, which is
beyond all description, and about which it will not be out of place to
speak here a little.

“First then, no one has his own house, so that it also belongs to all.
For, besides that, they all live together in sodalities; it is also
open to those of the brotherhood who come from other places. Moreover,
they have all one common treasury and store of provisions, common
garments, and common food for all who eat together. Such a mode of
sleeping together, living together, and eating together, could not be
so easily established in fact among any other people; and indeed it
would be impossible. For whatever they receive daily, if they work for
wages, they do not retain it as their own, but give it to the common
stock, and let every one that likes make common use of it. [29] Those
that are sick are not neglected because they can earn nothing, but have
what is necessary for their aid from the common stock, so that they
ever fare richly without wanting anything. They manifest respect,
reverence and care for the aged, just as children do for their parents,
administering to them a thousand times with all plentifulness both with
their hands and their counsels in their old age.

“Such champions of virtue does a philosophy produce which is free from
the subtlety of Greek word-splitting, and which deals with subjects
tending to the exercise of praiseworthy actions, and giving rise to
invincible freedom. This was seen in the fact that many tyrants have
arisen from time to time in that country, differing in character and
conduct. Some of them endeavoured to surpass in ferocity wild beasts;
they omitted no manner of barbarity, they sacrificed the vanquished in
whole troops, or, like butchers, cut off pieces and limbs of those that
were still living, and did not leave off till retributive justice,
which governs the affairs of man, plunged them into similar miseries.
Others, again, converted their frenzy and madness into a different kind
of wickedness. They adopted an inexpressible bitterness, spake gently,
and betrayed a ferocious temper under the mask of gentle language; [30]
they fawned like poisonous dogs, and brought about irremediable
miseries, leaving behind them in the cities, as monuments of their
impiety and hatred of mankind, the never to be forgotten miseries. But
neither the cruel tyrant nor the wily hypocrite could get any advantage
over the said brotherhood of Essenes or holy ones (Ἐσσαίων ἢ ὁσίων),
but disarmed by the virtues of these men, all recognised them as
independent and free by nature, praised their common meals and their
community of goods, which surpasses all description, and is an evident
proof of a perfect and very happy life.”

Philo’s second account, which has been preserved by Eusebius in his
Praep. Evàng., viii, 11, from the lost treatise entitled Apology for
the Jews, is as follows:— [31]

“Our lawgiver, Moses, formed innumerable (μυρίους) disciples into a
fellowship called Essenes, [32] who, as it appears, obtained this
appellation by virtue of their holiness (παρὰ τὴν ὁσιότητα). They dwell
in many cities of Judea, and in villages, and in large and populous
communities. Their order is not founded upon natural descent, but upon
admiration for virtue and sincere love for man. Hence there are
properly speaking no newly born ones among the Essenes, no children, no
youths, as the dispositions of these are unstable and liable to change
from the imperfections incident to their age; [33] but they are all
full grown men who are already approaching old age; and are no longer
carried away by the impetuosity of their bodily passions, but possess
the genuine and the only true and real liberty. A proof of their
freedom is to be found in their life. None of them strives to acquire
any private property, house, slave, farm, flocks, herds, or anything
which might be regarded as a source of riches, but they all give
everything to the common stock from which the common wants of all are
alike supplied.

“They all dwell together in the same place, form themselves into
companies, societies, combinations and unions, [34] and work together
all their life for the common good of the brotherhood. The different
members of the order are engaged in different employment; they work
cheerfully and industriously, and never try to leave their employment
on account of cold, heat, or any change of weather. They go to their
daily work before the sun rises, and do not leave off till some time
after it has set, when they return home rejoicing no less than those
who have been exercising themselves in gymnastic contests. [35] They
believe that their employment is a sort of gymnastic exercise of more
benefit to life, greater pleasure both to soul and body, and of a more
enduring advantage than any mere athletic labours, because they can
cheerfully continue in their work as a recreation even when youth and
bodily strength are gone. Those who are acquainted with the cultivation
of the land are engaged in agriculture; others, again, who understand
the management of animals, attend to the flocks; some are skillful in
the management of bees; and others again, are artizans and
manufacturers, thus guarding against the want of anything. They do not
omit anything which is requisite to supply the absolute necessities of
life.

“The appointed steward and general manager receives the wages which the
different people get for their respective employments, and forthwith
buys plenty of food and other necessaries of life. They eat at the same
table, and have every day the same food, being lovers of frugality and
moderation, and averse to luxury and extravagance as a disease of both
mind and body. Not only is their table in common, but their dress too
is in common. They have a store of rough cloaks in the winter, and in
the summer cheap garments without sleeves, to which every one can go
and freely take whichever kind he wants, for whatever belongs to one
belongs to all, and whatever belongs to all belongs to each individual.

“If one of them is sick, he is cured from the common resources, and is
attended to by the general care and anxiety of the whole body. The old
men, even if they happen to be childless, [36] end their lives in a
most happy, prosperous and tenderly cared for old age, as if they were
not only the fathers of many children, but were even also particularly
happy in an affectionate offspring. They are looked upon by such a
number of people as worthy of so much honour and provident regard, that
they think themselves bound to care for them even more from inclination
than from any tie of natural affection.

“Perceiving, with more than ordinary acuteness and accuracy, what is
alone, or at least above all other things, calculated to dissolve such
connections, they repudiate marriage; and at the same time practice
continence in an eminent degree. For no one of the Essenes marries a
wife, because woman is a selfish and excessively jealous creature, and
has great power to destroy the morals of man, and to mislead with
continual tricks; for she is always devising flattering speeches and
other kinds of hypocrisy as on a stage; bewitching the eyes and the
ears; and when they are subjugated like things stultified, she proceeds
to undermine the ruling intellect. [37]

“But when she has children, the woman becomes full of pride and
arrogance, audaciously speaks out that which she previously merely
indicated in treacherous disguise, and without any shame compels one to
do whatever is hostile to the brotherhood; for he who is chained by the
charms of a woman or cares for children by necessity of nature, is no
longer the same person to others, but is entirely changed, having
unawares become a slave instead of a free man.

“Such is the enviable system of life of the Essenes, so that not only
private individuals but even mighty kings have admired them, venerated
their brotherhood, and rendered their dignity and nobleness still
higher by the praise and honours which they lavished upon them.”

Next, in point of time, is Caius Plinius Secundus, called Major, or the
elder, the celebrated author of the Historia Naturalis, who was born in
A.D. 23, and died A.D. 79. Pliny’s notice of the Essenes, which is to
be found in his Natural History, book v., chap, xvii., is as follows:

“Towards the west [of the sea] and sufficiently distant from it, so as
to escape its noxious exhalations (ab occidente litora Esseni fugiunt,
usque qua nocent), are the Essenes. They are a hermitical society,
marvellous beyond all others throughout the whole earth. They live
without any women, without gratifying sensual desires, without money,
and in the company of palm trees. Their ranks are daily made up by
multitudes of new comers who resort to them; and who being weary of
life, and driven by the surges of ill-fortune, adopt their manner of
life. Thus it is that, through thousands of ages (per saeculorum
millia), [38] incredible to relate, this people prolongs its existence
without any one being born among them: so fruitful to them are the
weary lives of others.”

Next in point of time is Josephus, or Joseph ben Matthias, better known
by the name Flavius Josephus, who was born in Jerusalem about 37, A.D.
The description which this learned Jewish warrior and historian gives
us of the Essenes, although somewhat marred by being made to harmonise
with the systems of Greek philosophy, is very important, inasmuch as
Josephus was not only a Palestinian Jew, but at one period of his life
had actually joined the brotherhood. He tells us in his autobiography,
that when sixteen years old he determined to examine for himself the
respective merits of the three predominant sects, viz., of the
Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes, with the view of making a selection
from among them. His accounts of the Essenes are dispersed through his
works. The following is the first description contained in his Jewish
War, book ii, chap. viii, sec. 2–13.

Ҥ 2. There are three sects of philosophers among the Jews. The
followers of the first are called Pharisees, of the second Sadducees,
and of the third, who really seem to practise holiness, Essenes. [39]
Jews by birth, they love each other more than the others. [40] They
reject pleasure as an evil, and regard continence and not yielding to
passions as virtues. They despise marriage, and adopt the children of
others while still tender and susceptible of instruction, [41] and
regard them as their own relations, and train them in their practices.
They do not, however, repudiate marriage, and its consequent,
succession of the race in themselves; but they are afraid of the
lasciviousness of women, and are persuaded that none of them preserve
their fidelity to one man. [42]

Ҥ 3. They despise riches, have all things in common in a very
admirable manner, and there is not one to be found among them who is
richer than another; for it is a law that those who enter the sect must
give up their possessions to the society as common property, [43] so
that there is not to be seen among them all, either the abjectness of
poverty or the distinction of riches; but as every man’s goods are cast
into a common treasury, they all, like brothers, have one patrimony.
They regard ointment as defiling; and if one happens to be anointed
against his will, he immediately wipes it off his body. [44] To be
unadorned but dressed in white they regard as commendable. They have
stewards of their common property, appointed by general election, and
every one without distinction is proposed for all the offices.

Ҥ 4. They have no separate city, but some of them live anywhere; and
if any of the society come from other places, whatever they have lies
open for them, just as if it were their own; and they go to those whom
they have never seen before as if they had been most intimate. Hence
they take nothing with them when they go on a journey, [45] but arms
for defence against robbers. A steward is appointed in every city of
this order to provide strangers with clothes and other necessaries.
[46] The keeping and appearance of their body are such as of children
brought up in fear; they change neither garments nor shoes till they
are worn out or made unfit by time. [47] They neither sell nor buy
anything among themselves, but everyone gives of that which he has to
him that wants, and gets from him that which he needs; and even without
requital they can freely take whatever they want.

Ҥ 5. Their piety towards God is extraordinary, for they never speak
about worldly matters before the sun rises, but offer up, with their
faces towards it, some of the prayers transmitted by their forefathers,
as if they supplicated it to rise. [48] Hereupon, they are all sent by
the overseers, every one to work in the department in which he is
skilled; and, having diligently laboured till the fifth hour, assemble
again together in one place, girt round with their linen apron, and
have a baptism with cold water. [49] After this lustration they resort
to a special house, in which no one of another faith is admitted, and
go to the refectory purified as into a holy temple. [50] Having quietly
taken their seats the baker gives every one a loaf of bread according
to order, and the cook places before each one a dish with one sort of
food. The priest commences with prayer, and no one is allowed to taste
his food before grace is said. He also returns thanks after the meal;
for both at the commencement and at the conclusion they praise God as
the giver of their food. [51] Whereupon they put off their white
garments as if they were sacred, and betake themselves again to their
work till evening. On returning again they take their supper together,
at which strangers, who happen to be in the place, are allowed to sit
down with them. No noise or tumult ever desecrates their house, but
they let every one take part in the conversation in turn; and the
silence of those who are within appears to those that are without as
some awful mystery. The cause of this is the uninterrupted sobriety, as
well as the fact that their eating and drinking are so measured out as
just to suffice the cravings of nature.

Ҥ 6. Whilst they do nothing without the injunctions of their
overseers, yet there are two things in which they have free action,
viz., helping the needy, and shewing mercy; to help the deserving when
they are in want, and to give food to the hungry, they have perfect
liberty; but to give anything to their relations they are not allowed
without the permission of the overseers. They are just dispensers of
their anger, curbers of their passions, representatives of fidelity,
ministers of peace; and every word with them is of more force than an
oath. They avoid taking an oath, and regard it as worse than perjury;
for they say that he who is not believed without calling on God to
witness is already condemned of falsehood. [52] They take
extraordinarily great pains in studying the writings of the ancients,
and select that especially which is beneficial both for the soul and
body; hence they investigate medical roots and the property of minerals
for the cure of distempers. [53]

Ҥ 7. When any one desires to enter the sect, he is not immediately
admitted, but although he has to remain a whole year without, yet he is
obliged to observe their ascetic rules of living, and they give him an
axe, an apron as mentioned above, and a white garment. [54] If he has
given proof of continence during this time, he approaches nearer to
their life and partakes of the holier water of purification; but is
still not as yet admitted to their common table. Having thus given
proof of his perseverance, his conduct is tested two more years, and,
if found worthy, he is admitted into the society. But before he touches
the common meal, he swears, by most awful oaths, [55] first to fear
God, and next to exercise justice towards all men—neither to wrong any
one of his own accord nor by the command of others; always to detest
the wicked and side with the righteous; ever to keep faith inviolable
with all men, especially with those in authority, for no one comes to
office without the will of God; [56] not to be proud of his power nor
to outshine his subordinates, either in his garments or greater finery,
if he himself should attain to office; always to love truth and strive
to reclaim all liars; to keep his hands clear from stealing, and his
mind from unholy gain; not to conceal anything from the brotherhood,
nor disclose anything belonging to them to those without, though it
were at the hazard of his life. He has, moreover, to swear not to
communicate to any one their doctrines in any other way than he has
received them; [57] to abstain from robbing the commonwealth; and
equally to preserve the writings of the society and the names of the
angels. [58] By such oaths they bind those who enter the brotherhood.

Ҥ 8. Such as are caught in heinous sins are excommunicated from the
society; and the excommunicated frequently die a miserable death. For,
being bound by oaths and customs, they cannot receive food from any out
of the society, so that they are forced to eat herbs till, their bodies
being famished with hunger, they perish. [59] Hence they
compassionately receive many of them again when they are at their last
gasp, thinking that suffering, approaching unto death, is sufficient
for their sins.

Ҥ 9. In their verdicts they are most exact and just, and never give
sentence if there are less than a hundred of the brotherhood present:
but what is then decreed is irrevocable. Next to God they have the
highest veneration for the name of the lawgiver, Moses, and punish with
death any one who blasphemes it. To submit to the elders and to the
majority they regard as a duty: hence, when ten of them sit together,
no one will speak if the other nine do not agree to it. They avoid
spitting before the face, or to the right hand, [60] and are also
stricter than all other Jews not to touch any labour on the Sabbath
day—for they not only prepare their Sabbath-day’s food the day before,
that they may not kindle a fire on that day, but they will not move a
vessel out of its place [61] nor go to ease nature. On all other days
they dig a pit of a foot deep with the spade (such an one being given
to the novice), and having covered it all round with a cover, that it
may not offend the Divine rays, they set themselves over it, and then
put the earth, that was dug out again into the pit; and do this, after
having chosen the most lonely places. And although the voiding of
bodily excrements is natural, yet it is their custom to bathe after it,
as if they had been defiled. [62]

Ҥ 10. They are divided, according to the time of leading this mode of
life, into four different classes, and the juniors are so much inferior
to the seniors, that the latter must wash themselves when they happen
to touch the former, as if they had been defiled by a stranger. [63]
They live to a great age, so that many of them live to above a hundred
years—arising from the simplicity of their diet, as it appears to me,
and from their order. They despise suffering, and overcome pain by
fortitude. Death, if connected with honour, they look upon as better
than long life. Of the firmness of their minds in all cases the war
with the Romans has given ample proof; in which, though they were
tortured, racked, burned, squeezed, and subjected to all the
instruments of torment, that they might be forced to blaspheme the
lawgiver or eat what was forbidden, yet they could not be made to do
either of them; nor would they even once flatter their tormentors or
shed a tear, but, smiling through their torments and mocking their
tormentors, they cheerfully yielded up their souls, as those who would
soon receive them back again. [64]

Ҥ 11. For they firmly believe that the bodies perish and their
substance is not enduring, but that the souls are immortal—continue for
ever and come out of the most subtile ether—are enveloped by their
bodies, to which they are attracted through a natural inclination, as
if by hedges—and that when freed from the bonds of the body, they, as
if released from a long servitude, rejoice and mount upwards. In
harmony with the opinion of the Greeks, [65] they say that for the good
souls there is a life beyond the ocean, and a region which is never
molested either with showers or snow or intense heat—is always
refreshed with the gentle gales of wind constantly breathing from the
ocean; whilst to the wicked souls they assign a dark and cold corner,
full of never-ceasing punishments. And it seems to be according to the
same opinion that the Greeks assigned to their valiant men, whom they
called heroes and demigods, the Island of the Blessed, but to the souls
of the wicked the regions of the impious in Hades; as also their fables
speak of several there punished, as Sisyphus and Tantalus and Ixion and
Tityus. This they teach, partly because they believe that the souls are
immortal, and partly for the encouragement of virtue and the
discouragement of vice. For good men are made better in their lives by
the hope of reward after their death, whilst the passions of the wicked
are restrained by the fear they are in that, although they should be
concealed in this life, after death they must suffer everlasting
punishment. This is the doctrine of the Essenes about the
soul—possessing thereby an irresistible bait for those who have once
tasted their philosophy.

Ҥ 12. There are also some among them who undertake to foretell future
events, having been brought up from their youth in the study of the
sacred Scripture, in divers purifications, and in the sayings of the
prophets; and it is very seldom that they fail in their predictions.

Ҥ 13. There is also another order of Essenes who, in their way of
living, customs, and laws exactly agree with the others, excepting only
that they differ from them about marriage. For they believe that those
who do not marry cut off the principal part of human life—that is,
succession—especially that, if all were of the same opinion, the whole
race would soon be extinguished. They, however, try their spouses for
three years, and after giving evidence, by three natural purgations,
that they are fit to bear children, they marry them. They have no
connubial intercourse with them when with child, to show that they do
not marry to gratify lust, but only to have children. The women, too,
have their garments on when they have baths, just as the men have on
their aprons. Such are the customs of this brotherhood.”

The next mention which Josephus makes of them is in his Antiq. Book
xiii. chap. v. § 9, and is as follows:—

“§ 9. At this time [166 B.C.] there were three sects (αἱρέσεις) among
the Jews, differing in their opinion about human affairs. The first was
called the sect of the Pharisees, the second the sect of the Sadducees,
and the third the sect of the Essenes. The Pharisees affirm that some
things only, but not all, are the work of fate (τῆς εἱμαρμένης), and
some are in our own power, whether they should take place or whether
they should not occur; the sect of the Essenes maintain that fate
governs all things, [66] and that nothing can befal man contrary to its
determination and will (ψῆφος); whilst the Sadducees reject fate,
saying that there is no such thing, and that human events do not
proceed from it, and ascribe all to ourselves, so that we ourselves are
the cause of our fortunes, and receive what is evil from our own
inconsiderateness. However, I have given a more minute description of
this in the second book of the Jewish War.”

He speaks of them again in Antiq. Book xv. chap. x. § 4, towards the
end, and § 5, as follows:—

Ҥ 4. The Essenes, as we call them, were also exempted from this
necessity [of taking an oath of allegiance to Herod]. These men live
the same kind of life which among the Greeks has been ordered by
Pythagoras. [67] I have discoursed more fully about them elsewhere. The
reason, however, why Herod had the Essenes in such honour, and thought
more highly of them than of mortal nature, is worthy of record. For
this account, too, is not unsuitable for this history, inasmuch as it
shows the people’s opinion about the Essenes.

“§ 5. There was a certain Essene, named Menahem (Μενάημος = ‏מנחם‎) who
was celebrated not only for the uprightness of his conduct, but also
for the fore-knowledge of the future proceeding from God. When he once
saw Herod, as a boy going to school, he addressed him by the name of
‘King of the Jews.’ [68] Herod thought that he did not know him or that
he jested, and reminded him that he was of common origin. But Menahem
smiled on him most friendly, clapped him on the back with his hand, and
said—‘Thou wilt, nevertheless, be king, and wilt begin thy reign
happily, for God has found thee worthy of it. And remember the blows
that Menahem has given thee, as being the symbol of the change of thy
fortune. For this assurance will be salutary for thee when thou wilt
love justice and piety towards God and equity towards thy citizens.
However, I know that thou wilt not be such a one, for I can perceive it
all. Thou wilt, indeed, excel more than any one in happiness, and
obtain an everlasting reputation, but thou wilt forget piety and
justice. This will not be concealed from God, for he will visit thee
with his wrath for it, towards the end of thy life.’ Herod paid very
little attention to it at that time, as he had no hope of it. But as he
soon afterwards advanced to the dignity of king and was happy, he
ordered Menahem to come to him in the height of his dominion, and asked
him how long he should reign; but Menahem did not tell him. Seeing that
he was silent, he asked again whether he should reign ten years.
Whereupon he replied, ‘Yes; twenty, nay, thirty years;’ but did not
determine the exact limit of his reign. Herod, rejoicing on it, gave
Menahem his hand and dismissed him, and from that time continued to
honour the Essenes. I thought of relating this to the readers (though
to some it may seem incredible), and of making it known, as it concerns
us, because many of the Essenes are highly esteemed for their virtuous
conduct and knowledge of Divine things.”

Josephus also relates instances in which Essenes foretold future
events, in Antiq., book xviii., chap, ii., § 2; book xviii., chap.
xiii. § 3; and Jewish War, book 1, chap. iii., § 5.

The last account which Josephus gives us is to be found in his Antiq.,
book xviii., chap, i., § 2 and 5.

Ҥ 2. There have been three philosophies among the Jews ever since the
ancient time of the fathers (ἐκ τοῦ πάνυ ἀρχαίου τῶν πατρίων), that of
the Essenes, and that of the Sadducees, and a third which the so-called
Pharisees followed. Although I have already spoken of them in the
second book of the Jewish War, yet will I mention here also something
about them.

“§ 5. The doctrine of the Essenes delights in leaving all to God (Θεῷ
καταλιπεῖν φιλεῖ τὰ πάντα). They regard the soul as immortal, and say
that the attainment to virtue must be fought for with all our might.
Although they send consecrated gifts to the Temple, yet they never
bring any sacrifice on account of the different rules of purity which
they observe; hence, being excluded from the common sanctuary, they
offer sacrifices in themselves (spiritually). Otherwise, they are in
their manner of life the best of men, and employ themselves wholly in
the labour of agriculture. Their uprightness is to be admired above all
others who endeavour to practice virtue; such uprightness, which is by
no means to be found among the Greeks and foreigners, is not of recent
date, but has existed among them from times of yore (ἐκ παλαιοῦ),
striving most scrupulously not to disturb the community of goods, and
that the rich should not enjoy more of the common property than the
poor. This is the conduct of this people who are more than four
thousand in number. They never marry wives, nor endeavour after the
possession of property; for they believe that the latter leads to
injustice, and the former yields opportunities for domestic discord.
Living by themselves they serve each other. They choose good men, who
are also priests, to be the stewards of their incomes and the produce
of the fields, as well as to procure the corn and food. They do not
differ at all in their living, but are more like those whom the Dacae
call Polistae.”

We notice next the account of Caius Julius Solinus, the author of the
Geographical compendium called Polyhistor, who flourished about 238
A.D. His accounts, which are to be found in chap. xxxv. § 7–10 of his
work, are evidently derived from Pliny.

“In the interior of Judea, towards the west, are the Essenes, who
differ from the usages of all other nations in their marvellous
constitutions, and who, according to my opinion, have been appointed by
divine providence for this mode of life. No woman is to be found there;
connubial pleasures they have entirely renounced; money they know not,
and palm-berries are their food. [69] Not a single birth takes place
there, and yet there is no want of population. The place itself is
devoted to modesty. Although a very large number of persons run to it
from all quarters, yet none is admitted who is not thought to possess
purity, fidelity and innocence; for, if one has been guilty of the
slightest misdemeanour, though he endeavour to obtain admission by
offering never so large a fortune, he is excluded by a divine decree.
Thus it is that through an immense space of ages (per immensum spatium
saeculorum), incredible to relate, [70] this society is perpetuated
though no child is born among them.”

The next account is that of Porphyry, the neo-Platonic philosopher and
celebrated antagonist of Christianity, who was born 233 A.D. and died
about 306 A.D. His description of the Essenes, which is given in his
treatise On the Abstinence from Animal Food (Lugduni ap. Morillon,
1620, p. 381, &c.), is, as he himself tells us, taken from Josephus. He
has, however, made some alterations, as may be seen from the following:

“There were three sorts of philosophers among the Jews, the first were
headed by the Pharisees, the second by the Sadducees, and the third,
who seemed the most honourable (σεμνοτάτη), by the Essenes. The latter
formed such a society as Josephus has described it in different parts
of his works, as well as in the second book of the Jewish History,
which he composed in seven books, as in the eighteenth book of his
Antiquities, which he composed in twenty books, and in the second part
to the Greeks. [71]

“The Essenes are Jews by birth, and love one another more than other
people. They avoid sensual enjoyments as vices, and regard continence
and the power to resist the passions as the first virtue; they despise
marriage and adopt the children of strangers, whilst still young and
suitable for instruction, regard them as their own, and train them in
their usages. They do not repudiate matrimony and child birth in
themselves, but they guard against the sensuality of women. They
despise riches, and there is a wonderful community of goods among them.
There is no one found among them who occupies a distinguished position
through his wealth; for they have a law that those who enter the
society give up their possessions to the brotherhood, so that there is
no such thing among them as abjectness of poverty or arrogance of
riches; but the possessions of all put together form a fraternal and
common property. If one of them happens to be inadvertently anointed,
he immediately washes his whole body; for they regard it as
praiseworthy to have a dry skin, and they are always dressed in white.
They appoint stewards to manage their common property; and every one,
without distinction, is eligible for all the offices.

“They are not confined to one city, but live in different places, and
everything they have is at the service of the members who happen to
come from another city. Though meeting for the first time they at once
salute each other as intimate friends (ἴσασιν ὥσπερ συνήθεις); hence
they travel without taking anything with them. They do not change
either garments or sandals till they are torn or worn out by age; they
neither buy nor sell, but every one gives of that which he has to him
that wants it, and receives that which he needs; but even without
receiving anything in return they freely communicate to him that wants.
Their piety towards God is extraordinary. None of them speak about
anything profane before the sun rises; but they offer to it some of the
prayers transmitted to them by their forefathers, as if they
supplicated it to rise, &c., &c.” He repeats almost literally the whole
of § 5 of Josephus On the Jewish War, book ii. chap. viii., which we
have given above, p, 43.

Porphyry omits § 6 of Josephus, but gives, with a few verbal
alterations, both the whole of § 7, which describes the admission into
the order, and § 8, which describes the punishment. He omits the
greater part of § 9, and adds the following statement, which is not to
be found in Josephus. “Their food is so poor and scanty that they do
not require to ease nature on the Sabbath, [72] which they devote to
singing praises to God and to rest.” He omits from § 10 the description
of the division of the Essenes into four classes, and simply mentions
firmness in suffering and death. He also omits from § 11 the whole
piece beginning with the words “In harmony with the opinion of the
Greeks, &c.;” whilst he not only gives the whole of § 12, but has also
the following addition, “With such a manner of life, and with their
firm adhesion to truthfulness and piety, there are naturally many among
them who can foretel future events, &c.;” and concludes with the words,
“This is the nature of the order of the Essenes among the Jews,”
omitting altogether what Josephus says in § 13 about those Essenes who
marry.

Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia and metropolitan of Cyprus, who was
born in Bezanduca, a small town of Palestine, in the first part of the
fourth century, and died in 403, has also given us some brief notices
of the Essenes in his celebrated work Against the Heretics. His first
notice is to be found in Adver. Haer., lib. i. ord. x. p. 28, ed. Col.,
1682, under the title Against the Essenes and the Samaritans, and is as
follows:

“The Essenes continue in their first position, and have not altered at
all. According to them there have been some dissensions among the
Gorthenes, in consequence of some difference of opinion which has taken
place among them—I mean among the Sebuens, Essenes and Gorthenes. The
difference of opinion relates to the following matter. The law of Moses
commands the Israelites of all places to come up to Jerusalem to the
three festivals, viz., the feasts of the Passover, Pentecost and
Tabernacles. As the Jews in Judea and Samaria were largely dispersed,
it is supposed that those of them who made their pilgrimage to
Jerusalem went through Samaritan cities, and as the Samaritans assemble
at the same time to celebrate the festivals, a conflict arose between
them.”

Epiphanius speaks of them again (Adv. Haer., lib. i. ord. xix. p. 39),
and under the title, Against the Ossenes (κατὰ Ὀσσηνῶν), as follows:

“Next follow the Ossenes, who were closely connected with the former
sect. They too are Jews, hypocrites in their demeanour, and peculiar
people in their conceits. [73] They originated, according to the
tradition which I received, in the regions of Nabatea, Itruria,
Moabitis and Antilis, (Ἀρηϊλίτις), in the surrounding neighbourhood of
the so-called Dead Sea.... The name Ossenes, according to its
etymology, signifies the stout race (στιβυρὸν γένος).... A certain
person named Elxai joined them at the time of the Emperor Trajan, after
the advent of the Saviour, who was a false prophet. He wrote a
so-called prophetical book, which he pretended to be according to
divine wisdom. He had a brother named Jeeus, who also misled people in
their manner of life, and caused them to err with his doctrine. A Jew
by birth, and professing the Jewish doctrines, he did not live
according to the Mosaic law, but introduced quite different things, and
misled his own sect.... He joined the sect of the Ossenes, of which
some remnants are still to be found in the same regions of Nabatea and
Perea towards Moabitis. These people are now called Simseans.” [74]

“But hear the Sadducee’s nonsense (comp. ibid., p. 42): he rejects the
sacrificial and altar services, as repulsive to the Deity, and as
things which, according to the meaning of the fathers and the Mosaic
law, were never offered to the Lord in a worthy manner. Yet he says
that we must pray with our faces to Jerusalem, where the sacrificial
altar and the sacrifices have their place. He rejects the eating of
animal flesh which is common among the Jews, and other things; nay,
even the sacrificial altar and the sacrificial fire, as being foreign
to the Deity. The purifying water, he says, is worthy of God, but the
fire is unworthy, because of the declaration of the prophet: ‘Children,
go ye not there to see the fire of the sacrifices, for ye err; yea, it
is already an error to think such a thing.’ ‘If you look at the fire
very closely,’ says he, ‘it is still far off. Moreover, go ye not to
look at the sacrificial fire, but go ye rather to the doctrine of the
water....’ There is much more of such idle talk to be found among the
Ossenes.” [75]

These are the sources from which writers upon the Essenes have, till
within very lately, drawn their information. As to the account of
Eusebius (comp. Hist. Ecclesiast., lib. ii, cap. xvii), to which appeal
is often made, it is nothing but a Christianized reproduction of the
so-called Philonic description of the Therapeutae. It would therefore
be useless to give it. In looking through these accounts, it will be
seen that there are only three independent ones among them,
namely—Philo’s, Josephus’s and Pliny’s; as the notice of Solinus is
merely a repetition of Pliny, the description of Porphyry is almost a
literal reproduction of Josephus; whilst the distorted scraps of
Epiphanius are not only worse than useless, but are unworthy of him,
and the account of Eusebius is simply misleading, inasmuch as it is a
repetition of an apocryphal story, which has nothing to do with the
Essenes.








III.


Having given the ancient documents, all that now remains is that I
should give a brief sketch of the most important modern literature on
the Essenes. In doing this part of my task, as in the former, I shall
try as much as it is possible to follow the chronological order.

1513–1577.—Accordingly De Rossi occupies the first position. In his
erudite work, called Meor Enajim, i.e., The Light of the Eyes, which is
a Cyclopœdia of Biblical literature and criticism, this profound critic
gives us a brief notice of this brotherhood, in which he maintains that
the Essenes are identical with the Greek sect called Baithusians in the
Talmud, and Therapeutae by Philo. His account is as follows: “It has
often appeared to me strange that the Talmud should say nothing
whatever about that sect which obtained a good report among the
nations. I therefore examined the works of our sages, to ascertain
whether I could find in them any distinction made between the Sadducees
and the Baithusians. And it appeared to me that though both alike
denied the traditional law (‏התורה שעל פה‎), yet the Baithusians are no
where charged with the sin of denying, like the Sadducees, the
immortality of the soul and future judgment. Moreover, I thought of the
similarity of the names Baithusians and Essenes (‏ביתוסים איסיאי‎), and
especially of the manner in which the ancients changed names. Now,
owing to the word ‏בית‎ being so frequently found prefixed to names of
schools and families, the appellation ‏ביתוסים‎ might easily have
originated from a junction of the words ‏בית איסיאי‎. I also saw the
passage in the Talmud, Sabbath, cap. viii, fol. 108, as quoted also in
Sopherim, cap. i, which is as follows:—‘A Baithusian asked R. Joshuah
whence do we know that phylacteries must not be written upon the skin
of an unclean animal?’ To which he replied—‘It is written that the
Lord’s law may be in thy mouth, (Exod. xiii, 9) this signifies that
phylacteries must be written upon the skin of an animal which thou
canst take into thy mouth, i.e., eat.’ To this he said—‘This being the
case, we must also not write the phylacteries upon the skin of an
animal which died;’ [for an Israelite is as much forbidden to taste the
flesh of it, as to eat an unclean animal.] Hereupon the Rabbi
replied—‘I will tell thee a parable, to make the thing clear. Two men
are condemned to death: the one the king kills, and the other is killed
by the executioner: now, which of the two dost thou esteem higher?
Surely the one whom the king himself has executed. So the animal which
died, [i.e., which the King of Kings caused to die] must be preferred
to the others.’ Whereupon the Baithusian said—‘Accordingly, we ought
also to eat it.’ R. Joshuah replied—‘The Bible prohibits it (Deut.
xiv), and dost thou want to eat it?’ The Baithusian then said—‘‏קלוס‎.’
This expression Rashi of blessed memory rightly says is Greek; i.e.
‘καλὸν.’ Hence it is to be inferred that the Baithusian was a Greek;
and, indeed, we know from Philo and Josephus that the Essenes were also
Greek Jews, living in Alexandria.... From all these things I easily
quieted my mind, and concluded that the Baithusians are the same as the
Essenes.’ [76] Now, from a careful perusal of the account given by
Josephus of the Essenes, it will be seen that he never describes them
as Greek Jews. Besides, this is utterly at variance with ancient
tradition, as the Talmudic authorities most positively declare that the
Baithusians and Sadducees were both alike in doctrine, that both
derived their names from the founder of these sects, Baithos (‏ביתוס‎)
and Zadok (‏צדיק‎), the disciples of Antigonus of Soho, and that they
gave rise to these sects, through misinterpreting the following saying
of their master [77] which he had received from Simon the Just:—“Be not
like servants who serve their master for the sake of receiving a
reward, but be ye like servants who serve their master without the view
of receiving a reward,” recorded in Aboth. i. 3. Upon this Aboth d. R.
Nathan (cap. v.) remarks, “Antigonus’ two disciples at first continued
implicitly to teach this saying to their disciples, and these again to
their disciples. At last, however, they began to ponder over it, and
said—‘What did our fathers mean by this saying? Is a labourer to labour
all day and not receive his wages in the evening? Now if our fathers
had believed that there is another world, and a resurrection of the
dead, they would not have spoken thus.’ Hence they dissented from the
law, and from them originated the two sects, the Sadducees and the
Baithusians, the Sadducees from Sadok and the Baithusians from Baithus.
They used gold and silver vessels all the days of their life, not
because they were proud, but because they said that the Pharisees
themselves have a tradition that they afflict themselves in this world,
and have nothing in the world to come.” From this we see that 1. The
Baithusians, like the Sadducees, derived their appellation from the
proper name of their founder, which is Baithus ‏ביתוס‎ so that the
first part of the name ‏בית‎ cannot be separated from it. 2. Like the
Sadducees, the Baithusians denied the immortality of the soul and the
existence of angels, whereas the Essenes firmly believed in the
immortality of the soul, and made the angels play a very important part
in their creed. That the Sadducees and the Baithusians were considered
to be identical, or, at all events, to hold similar doctrines is also
evident from the fact that what is in one place of the Talmud ascribed
to the former, is in another place ascribed to the latter. Thus, for
instance, in Succa 48 b. the Sadducees are said to have questioned the
necessity of bringing a libation of water on the Feast of Tabernacles;
in Tosifta Succa cap. iii. it is ascribed to the Baithusians. In
Maccoth, 5, b. Chagiga, 16 b. it is said that the Sadducees urged that
a false witness should only then be executed if the individual whom he
had falsely accused had already been executed; in Tosifta Sanhedrin,
cap. vi. the same thing is ascribed to the Baithusians. According to
Joma, 19 b. 53 a, the Sadducees would have it that the High Priest
should put the incense on the fire outside the Sanctuary on the great
Day of Atonement, in Tosifta Joma, cap. 1, and Jerusalem Joma, i. 5,
this is also ascribed to the Baithusians. Comp. also 115, b., Megillath
Taanith, cap. vi., with Tosifta Jadajim cap. ii. And 4. The Baithusians
are constantly spoken of as heretics and false witnesses (comp.
Jerusalem Rosh Ha-Shana, ii, 1; Babl. ibid. 226), which is utterly at
variance with the high character given to the Essenes even by those who
belonged to opposite sects.

1587–1643.—Our learned countryman, Dr. Thomas Godwyn occupies the next
position. In his interesting and erudite volume, entitled Moses and
Aaron: which was first published in London 1625, Godwyn devotes the
twelfth chapter of the first book to the Essenes. The etymology of this
name he takes to be the Syriac ‏אסא‎ to heal, to cure diseases, and
submits that they were called Essenes = θεραπευται physicians, because
they cultivated the study of medicine. His summary of their doctrines
and practices is made from Josephus’ description of them as well as
from Philo’s reputed account of the Therapeutae which has nothing to do
with the Palestinian Essenes. Godwyn also gives a number of supposed
parallels between the doctrines and practices of Essenism and
Pythagorism. He does not attempt to account for these resemblances, nor
does he try to trace the origin of the brotherhood. He is, however,
certain that they existed in the time of Judas Maccabæus and “continued
until the day of our Saviour and after; for Philo and Josephus speak of
them as living in their time.” He assigns the following reasons for
their not being mentioned in the New Testament 1. Their being small in
number. 2. “They were peaceable and quiet, not opposing any; and
therefore not so liable to reproof as the Pharisees and Sadducees, who
opposed each other, and both joined against Christ.” 3. They were
passed over in silence in the New Testament just “as the Rechabites in
the Old Testament, of whom there is mention only once and that
obliquely, although their order continued about three hundred years,
before this testimony was given of them by the Prophet Jeremiah.” And
4. “Though the name of the Essenes be not found in Scripture, yet we
shall find in St. Paul’s Epistles many things reproved, which were
taught in the school of the Essenes. Of this nature was that advice
given unto Timothy:—‘Drink no longer water, but use a little wine.’ (1
Tim. v. 23). Again, ‘Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain
from meats is a doctrine of devils’ (1 Tim. iv. 3); but especially
Colossians ii., in many passages the Apostle seemeth directly to point
at them, ‘Let no man condemn you in meat and drink’ (verse 16): ‘Let no
man bear rule over you, by humbleness of mind and worshipping of
angels’ (verse 18) ‘Why are ye subject to ordinances (τί δογματίζεσθε
verse 20)?’ The Apostle useth the word δόγματα which was applied by the
Essenes to denote their ordinances aphorisms or constitutions. In the
verse following he gives an instance of some particulars, ‘Touch not,
taste not, handle not’ (ver. 21). Now the junior company of Essenes
might not touch the seniors. And in their diet their taste was limited
to bread, salt, water and hyssop. And these ordinances they undertook
διὰ πόθον σοφίας saith Philo, for the love of wisdom; but the Apostle
concludeth (ver. 23) that these things had only λόγον σοφίας a show of
wisdom. And whereas Philo termeth the religion of the Essenes by the
name of θεράπεια which word signifieth religious worship; the Apostle
termeth in the same verse εθιλεθρεκείαν voluntary religious worship or
will worship; yea, where he termeth their doctrine πάτρων φιλοσοφιας a
kind of philosophy received from their forefathers by tradition; St.
Paul biddeth them beware of philosophy (ver. 8).” I have given this
extract in full because succeeding writers have with more or less
exactness based their opinion upon it. In animadverting upon it, I need
only refer to the former part of this Essay, where it will be seen that
some of the things here mentioned, are not peculiar to the Essenes, and
others do not belong to them at all, whilst the last quotation from
Philo describes the Therapeutae and not the Essenes. [78]

1628–1678.—Next in point of time is Theophilus Gale, who gives us a
description of the Essenes in his famous work called The Court of the
Gentiles, part ii. (Oxford, 1671), book ii. § 9, p. 146–156. As might
be expected from this learned writer, who wrote this elaborate work to
demonstrate that “the original of all human literature, both philology
and philosophy, is from the Scriptures and the Jewish Church,” he
endeavours to prove that Pythagoras took the whole of his philosophic
system from the Essenes. “As for the origination of their name,” Gale
tells us, “they were called ‏חסדים‎ i.e. according to the Greek καθαροὶ
and according to our English dialect pure. Now the origination or rise
of these Essenes I conceive (by the best conjectures I can make from
antiquity), to be in or immediately after the Babylonian captivity
(though some make them later), and the occasion of their separation and
consociation seems this. Many of the carnal Jews defiling themselves
either by being too deeply plunged in worldly affairs, even to the
neglect of their religion, or, which was worse, by sensual compliances
with their idolatrous lords, thereby to secure their carnal interests,
these ‏חסדים‎ or Essenes, to preserve themselves from these common
pollutions, separated and retired themselves from the crowd of worldly
affairs into an holy solitude, and private condition of life; where
they entered into a strict confederation or consociation to lead
together a collegiate devout life.” [79] He then gives an epitome of
their doctrines and practices, and finally endeavours to shews that
Pythagoras got his system from them. In doing this, Gale mixes up the
Therapeutae with the Essenes, and follows largely the description of
Godwyn.

1643–1724.—We then come to Dean Prideaux, who has a lengthy description
of the Essenes in The Old and New Testaments Connected, part ii. book
v., which first appeared in London, 1717. The chief value of Prideaux’s
work on this subject consists in the fact, that he has given in English
Philo and Josephus on the Essenes, as well as the short notice from
Pliny. In his own remarks, which follow these extracts, he, in common
with his predecessors, mixes up the Therapeutae with the Essenes, and
tries to repel the Romanists who adopted the assertion of Eusebius
(Hist. Ecclesiast. lib. ii. c. 17), that these Therapeutae or
contemplative Essenes were Christian monks instituted by St. Mark. He
also endeavours to expose the folly of the Deists, who infer, from the
agreement between the Christian religion and the documents of the
Essenes, that Christ and his followers were no other than a sect
branched out from that of the Essenes. Among the accusations which the
Dean brings against the Essenes for violating the law of God, is the
charge that they “absolutely condemned servitude which the holy
Scriptures of the New Testament (Philemon 9–21), as well as the Old,
allow.” [80] Instead of blaming them for repudiating slavery, we
believe that the civilized world in the present day will be unanimous
in pronouncing it to have been one of the glorious features of
Essenism, anticipating the spirit of Christianity and the philanthropy
of the nineteenth century.

1653–1723.—Basnage gives a very lengthy account of the Essenes in his
History of the Jews lib. ii. chaps. xii. xiii. Those who are acquainted
with the writings of this learned Frenchman, know that he could not
write on anything without bringing together a mass of useful
information. He, however, mistook the character of the Essenes, as well
as the value of the documents upon which he relies. Preferring Philo’s
account to that of Josephus, though the latter lived amongst the
Essenes, Basnage confounds the brotherhood with the Therapeutae, and
hence asserts that “they borrowed several superstitions from the
Egyptians, among whom they retired.” Through this, he is led to occupy
by far the greater part of his description with the needless discussion
of the question “Whether the Essenes from being Jews were converted to
Christianity by St. Mark, and founded a monastic life.” [81]

1692–1762.—Dr. Jennings’ chapter on the Essenes is simply a commentary
on Godwyn’s account. Jennings disputes some of the imaginary parallels
between Essenism and Pythagorism exhibited by Godwyn, and inclines to
the opinion “that the Essenes begun a little before the time of the
Maccabees, when the faithful Jews were forced to fly from the cruel
persecutions of their enemies into deserts and caves, and by living in
those retreats, many of them being habituated to retirement, which
thereby became most agreeable to them, they chose to continue it, even
when they might have appeared upon the public stage again, and
accordingly formed themselves into recluses.” As to the difficulty to
account for “the absolute silence of the evangelical history concerning
the Essenes,” Jennings reiterates the remarks of Godwyn upon the
subject. [82]

In 1821, appeared in Berlin, Bellermann’s valuable little volume on the
Essenes and Therapeutae. [83] The author with characteristic German
industry and perseverance, brought together in this monograph the
ancient documents on the Essenes. His critical acumen, however, is not
commensurate to his industry, and while his little volume will
deservedly continue to be a useful manual for the student who wishes to
acquaint himself with what Philo, Pliny, Josephus, Solinus, Porphyry,
Epiphanius and Eusebius said upon this subject, it is to be questioned
whether Bellermann’s conclusions will be shared by many. He is of
opinion that “the Essenes and Baithusians are the same both in name and
doctrine,” and that “the Essenes have four other names in history
besides their proper name, viz.:—they are called, 1, Therapeutae by the
Greek Alexandrians. 2. Hiketeans by Philo, in the superscription to the
Treatise on contemplative life. 3. Ossenes or Ossens, by Epiphanius.
And 4, Baithusians in the Talmud, and by several Rabbins. As this
notion, which has been advanced by De Rossi three centuries and a half
ago, has already been refuted, it would be needless to repeat the
arguments here.

1825.—Neander, whose first instalment of his gigantic Church History
appeared in 1825, now began to grapple with this mysterious
brotherhood. In the introductory chapter of this history, in which a
description is given of the religious condition of the world at the
advent of Christ, he gives a very brief but very pregnant sketch of the
Essenes. With that deep penetration, which was one of the chief
characteristics of this sagacious critic, he repudiates the notion that
the Essenes originated under foreign influences, and maintains that “it
is a gross error to infer from the resemblance of certain religious
phenomena the relationship of which is to be traced to a common inward
cause, inherent in the nature of the human mind, that they have an
external origin, having been copied from the other.” Hence, he submits
that Essenism arose out of the deeper religious meaning of the Old
Testament, that it afterwards adopted some of the old Oriental, Parsee,
and Chaldean notions, and that it had no Alexandrian elements. Neander
moreover most justly cautions against the accounts of Philo and
Josephus, saying that they clothed the opinions of the Essenes in a
garb peculiarly Grecian, which we might rightly consider as not
originally belonging to them. [84]

1829.—The difficulty which perplexed Christian writers, arising from
the fact that the Essenes are not mentioned in the New Testament, did
not affect Jewish writers, although it is true that this name is also
not to be found in the ancient Jewish writings. For if it be granted
that this appellation is a corruption of an Aramaic word, the Essenes
must be looked for in the Talmud and Midrashim, which are chiefly
written in Aramaic, under their original designation whatever that
might be. The clue to it must, of course, be the identity of the
features ascribed to them by Philo and Josephus and those ascribed in
the ancient Jewish volumes to any order of Judaism. To this task
Rappaport, the corypheus of Jewish critics, betook himself. Knowing
that the Essenes were no distinct sect, in the strict sense of the
word, but simply an order of Judaism, and that there never was a
rupture between them and the rest of the Jewish community, Rappaport
most justly does not expect that they would be spoken of under a fixed
denominational name. He therefore rejects De Rossi’s notion that the
Baithusians, so frequently denounced in the Talmud and Midrashim, are
the Essenes described by Philo and Josephus, and sought to identify
them by their peculiar practices, expecting to find that they would be
spoken of by different names. He soon found that what Philo and
Josephus describe as peculiarities of the Essenes tallies with what the
Mishna, the Talmud, and the Midrashim record of the Chassidim
(‏חסדים‎), and that they are most probably the so-called old believers
(‏ותיקין‎), who are also described in the Talmud as the holy community
in Jerusalem (‏קהלא קדישא דבירושלים‎). He rightly recognised in them an
intensified form of Pharisaism, and remarks that what is said in the
Mishna about the moderation observed in eating and drinking, the great
humility, endurance under sufferings, zeal for everything that is holy,
community of goods, &c, refers to this holy community, or the Essenes.
He also quotes the following remark from the Midrash Coheleth, on
Eccles. ix, 9, about this holy community; “Rabi repeated from the
traditions of the holy community (‏עדה קדושה‎) ‘acquire a trade in
connection with the study of the Scriptures, &c.’—[Query] ‘Why are they
called holy community?’ [Reply] ‘Because they divided the day into
three divisions—devoting one-third to the study of the Scriptures,
another to prayer, and the third to work. Some say that they devoted
the whole of the winter to studying the Scriptures and the summer to
work.’” He, too, was the first who pointed out that the prayer which
Josephus tells us the Essenes offered up at the rising of the sun, is
the national hymn of praise, which still constitutes a part of the
Jewish daily service, and is as follows:—


    He in mercy causes His light to shine upon the earth and upon the
    inhabitants thereof; and in His goodness unfailingly renews every
    day the work of creation. How numerous are Thy works, O Lord! Thou
    hast made them all in wisdom; the earth is full of Thy possessions.
    O King, Thou only art the exalted one from everlasting, the praised
    and glorified and extolled since the days of yore! Lord of the
    universe, in Thy great mercy have mercy upon us! Lord our might,
    fortress of our strength, shield of our salvation, defend us! O
    Lord, be Thou praised, Thou great in wisdom, who hast ordained and
    created the rays of the sun: the Infinitely Good has formed a
    glorious testimony for His name. He surrounded His majesty with
    luminaries. The chiefs of His heavenly hosts are holy beings; they
    glorify the Almighty; they continually declare the glory of God and
    his holiness. Blessed be the Lord our God, for the excellency of
    the works of Thy hands, and for the shining luminaries which Thou
    hast. They shall glorify Thee for ever.

    God, the Lord of all created things, is praised and blessed in the
    mouths of all the living. His power and goodness fill the universe;
    wisdom and intelligence are round about Him. He exalts himself
    above the angels, and beams in glory upon his chariot-throne.
    Interceding goodness and rectitude are before His throne,
    loving-kindness and mercy before his majesty. Benign are the
    luminaries which our God has created. He has formed them in wisdom,
    intelligence, and understanding; He has endowed them with power and
    strength, to bear rule in the midst of the world. Filled with
    splendour and brightness, their glory illuminates all the world;
    rejoicing in rising and joyous in setting they perform with awe the
    will of their Creator. They give praise and glory to His name, joy
    and song to the memory of His kingdom. He called the sun, and light
    rose; He saw and shaped the form of the moon. Praise Him all ye
    heavenly hosts; ascribe glory and majesty to Him ye seraphim,
    ophanim, and holy angels.


These, as Rappaport rightly remarks, are some of the remains of the
ancient prayer used by the Essenes. It will be seen that these hymns of
praise contain not only thanksgiving for the renewal of the light, to
which Josephus refers, but they also refer to the mysterious cosmogony
(‏מעשה בראשית‎) and theosophy (‏מעשה מרכבה‎), as well as to the angels
which played such an important part among this brotherhood. [85]

1835.—The difficulty of reading Rabbinical Hebrew in which Rappaport’s
profound remarks are written, must have prevented Gfrörer from seeing
what this erudite Jewish critic had written on the Essenes; for,
although the second edition of vol. i. part 11 of his Critical History
of Primitive Christianity, containing an account of the Essenes,
appeared in 1835, yet he positively states “that the Essenes and the
Therapeutae are the same sect and hold the same views” (p. 299).
According to him, the development of Essenism is as follows. In the
third century before Christ, the Jews in Alexandria formed societies
according to the Pythagorean model, and thus originated the sect called
the Therapeutae, from these Egyptian Therapeutae again Essenism
developed itself in Palestine about 130 B.C. Hence Essenism is the
channel through which the Alexandrian theosophy was first transplanted
into Palestinian soil. The reason why the Essenes kept their doctrines
secret is that the Palestinian priests were hostile to this foreign
importation, and persecuted those who received this contraband.
Accordingly, the relationship of Pythagorism, Therapeutism and
Essenism, to use Gfrörer’s own figure, is that of grandmother, mother
and daughter. “So perfect is the agreement between the Therapeutae and
the Essenes, that it even extends to their names. For the word Ἐσσαῖνς
according to the most correct etymology, is derived from the
Syro-Chaldaic verb ‏אסא‎ which denotes to cure, to nurse, and hence is
nothing but a literal translation of θεραπευτὴς.” [86]

1843.—Similar in spirit is the elaborate article on the Essenes in
Ersch und Gruber’s Cyclopœdia, written by Dähne, who maintains that
“Essenism is the produce of the Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy, and that
it is only when viewed from this stand-point that the deviations from
the rest of their Jewish co-religionists, and their peculiar
institutions, doctrines, and precepts appear in the clearest light.” It
is not surprising that holding such an opinion Dähne should feel
perplexed to account for the existence of this thoroughly
Jewish-Alexandrian order, as he makes the Essenes to be, in the very
heart of Palestine. All that he can say upon this subject is, that they
somehow got there in the middle of the second century before Christ.
The affiliation of Essenism to the Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy brings
it into most intimate relationship with Therapeutism, and necessarily
devolves upon Dähne to define this family connection which he does in
the following manner. [87] “The difference between the Therapeutae and
the Essenes, both of whom are followers of the Jewish-Alexandrian moral
philosophy, is that the former devoted themselves entirely to a
contemplative life, whilst the latter gave themselves more especially
to a practical life. Hence though both rest upon the same foundation,
the Therapeutae gave themselves up absolutely to the highest aim of
man, as they marked it out, the contemplation of God; whilst the
Essenes to some extent voluntarily lingered in the outer court of the
Holy of Holies, placed themselves intentionally for the good of the
brethren in more frequent contact with the world than the requirements
of nature demanded, thereby generously, but certainly
unphilosophically, temporarily retarding their own highest perfection
and happiness.” Like De Rossi, Bellermann, Gfrörer and others, Dähne
derives the name from the Chaldee ‏אסא‎ to heal, and says “accordingly
the term Essenes denotes spiritual physicians, or men who strive in the
highest sense to lead back the spirit to its natural (i.e. truly
divine) character and activity.” [88]

1846.—A new epoch began in the history of the Essenes with the
investigation of Frankel on this subject, which appeared in his
Zeitschrift für die religiözen Interesse des Judenthums, 1846. Taking
up the idea of Rappaport, that the Essenes must be looked for in the
body of the Jews and not as a separate sect, Frankel refers to the fact
that, whilst the Assideans = Chassidim are referred to in 1 Macc. ii.
24; 2 Macc. xiv. 6, &c., the Perushim = Pharisees are never mentioned,
to show that no such marked and denominational divisions existed at
first in the community, and rightly remarks, that it “is only after a
longer development that sects appear in their separation, and sharply
defined features, when that which originally formed a united whole is
now divided and parted into various branches. And even this partition
and separation only shew themselves to the analysing mind, and
especially when the analysis is conducted after a foreign fashion, as
Josephus has done it, who reduced the Jewish sects into Greek schools,
and made the Essenes correspond to the Pythagoreans. But in reality
even these divisions flow one into another, and do not stand in
opposition to one another, but are simply to be distinguished by their
different shades of colour, and by the greater stringency or laxity
with which the same rules are regarded, so that they do not form
separate sects, but some individuals keep to these rules with greater
anxiety, whilst others, though considering them as binding, do not
regard them as having such a wide application. Now in early times there
were only Essenes = Chassidim (‏חסדים‎), the name of Perush = Pharisee
(‏פרוש‎) was not as yet known; it was only afterwards when in
succeeding periods some became more rigid in their manner of life and
views of religion, that the name Pharisees (‏פרושים‎) appears to denote
the less strict Jews, whilst the others were in a special degree
denominated by the old, respectable appellation Chassidim = Essenes
(‏חסדים‎).” This, Frankel corroborates by showing most clearly that
many of the vital principles which Josephus describes as peculiar to
Essenism, are at the very basis of Pharisaism, and that the Essenes are
frequently mentioned in the Mishna, Talmud, and Midrashim by the names
‏חסדים הראשונים‎ the original Assideans = Chassidim, ‏חברים‎ the
associates, ‏ותיקין‎ those who have enfeebled their bodies through much
study; ‏דבירושלים‎ the retired ones; ‏צנועין קהלא קדישא‎ the holy
congregation in Jerusalem; ‏טובלי שחרית‎ hemerobaptists. Frankel
concluded his essay with the promise to return to this subject on some
future occasion. [89]

1847.—Within twelve months of the publication of Frankel’s elaborate
Essay, an article appeared in the American Quarterly entitled The
Biblical Repository. As there was not sufficient time for this German
production to become known in the New World, Mr. Hall, the writer of
the article, could not avail himself of it, and was therefore obliged
to derive his information from the writings of Dr. Neander. But though
Mr. Hall has thrown no light on the Essenes, yet his reflections upon
their moral character and their connection with Christianity are so
just, sensible and candid, that we subjoin them to show that good
Christians may honestly acknowledge the good in Essenism without
detracting from Christianity.


    “Let us give the Essene credit for all that he was as a worshipper
    of the true God, and as a man striving after moral purity in a
    corrupt age. The Gospel that breathed new life into the higher
    nature of man, can afford to allow all his virtues. We know that
    the Spirit of Christ opens the eye to the excellencies of others.
    Truth rejoices in truth, and as all truth is from the same source,
    the lustre of one development can never be increased by hiding the
    glory of another. We would not enhance the necessity of our Lord’s
    appearance by depreciating the moral condition of mankind at that
    period. Those ascetic Jews deserve well of mankind for the light
    they gave out in a dark age. We admire the humanity and justice of
    their principles; their disapproval of war and slavery in the midst
    of a world lying in wickedness, and the noble example of industry,
    frugality and moderation in the things of this life they set before
    all. We honour their honest endeavours to combine the vita
    contemplativa and the vita activa,—to escape the bondage of the
    senses, to maintain the supremacy of the spirit, and to unite
    themselves with the Highest. But in all these respects, they are
    only the true children of monotheism, the legitimate offspring of
    the Jewish theocracy. They could have sprung up nowhere else. In
    the phenomenon of the Essenes let us therefore adore the provident
    wisdom of Jehovah, and recognize the secret working of his love in
    carrying forward the great, eternal economy of salvation. They
    exerted an influence on their age which helped to pave the way for
    the Christ. Conscience spoke, and was spoken to, through them; and
    the dying sense of virtue was kept alive. Thus were they stars
    which emitted an humble though useful light before, but grew pale
    and became invisible after, the coming of the Sun of
    Righteousness.” [90]


1852.—Though Ewald published the second edition of the fourth volume of
his Jewish History in 1852, when Frankel’s Essay had been six years
before the literary world, yet he manifests total ignorance of it in
his account of the Essenes, contained in this volume. Still, this
profound and merciless critic, without having access to the Jewish
information gathered from the Talmud and Midrashim, saw that Essenism
was no Greek plant transplanted into Palestine, but like Pharisaism
grew out of the Chassidim. He remarks that “people who left the great
community in order to lead a specially holy life, with the permission
and under the direction of the law, were to be found in Israel from the
remotest times, yet in its first form there were only the Nazarites, of
whom each one lived for himself; and in the second, the Rechabites
combined themselves already into a larger union; but now the whole
conscience of the people itself, as it were, departed into solitude
with numerous Essenes. For it cannot be denied that they, proceeding
from the Chassidim, represent the direct and legitimate development of
Judaism in the form which became the ruling one since Ezra.” “Their new
features and endeavours merely consisted in their intensely earnest and
rigorous application of the demands of the law, as understood and
interpreted since Ezra. Finding that the rigorous and logical
application of these laws was impossible in the great community,
especially in that community as regulated by the Pharisees, they
preferred to congregate and live in solitude.” [91] Very unfortunate is
Ewald’s derivation of Essene from the Rabbinic ‏חזן‎ servant (of God),
and the assertion that this name was given to them because it was their
only desire to be θεραπευταὶ θεοῦ.

1853.—Nearly seven years had now elapsed since Frankel published his
masterly Essay on the Essenes, and promised to return to this subject
at some future time. True to his promise, he now gave another elaborate
treatise, in which he substantiated, by numerous quotations from the
Talmud, his former conclusions, that the Essenes are the offspring of
Judaism, that they are nothing but stationary, or more correctly
speaking consequential Chassidim, that they were therefore not so far
distant from the Pharisees as to be regarded as a separate sect, but,
on the contrary, that they formed a branch of Pharisaism. [92]

1856.—So convincing was Frankel’s Treatise, that Graetz, who published
the third volume of his masterly History of the Jews in 1856, in which
he gives an elaborate account of this brotherhood, remarks: [93] “I
completely accept these results about this sect being based upon
critical investigation, and shall only add a few supplementary points
by way of illustration.” [94] The additions consist of a very able
analysis of Philo’s reputed Treatise entitled De Vita Contemplativa,
showing that it is spurious, and of an attempt to show that the Essenes
were perpetual Nazarites (‏נזירי עולם‎). His remarks are as
follow—“There were great masses of Nazarites in the post-exile period
(Tosifta Nasir, c. iv.; Babbi Berachoth, 48 a; 1 Macc. ii. 49; Joseph.
Antiq. xviii. vi.), but they were of a different character to those of
the Biblical period; they were Nazarites for the whole life (Nasir 4
a.) The Mishna presupposed their existence; the magical in Nazaritism,
which was connected with the growing of the hair in the Nazarites of
the Bible, gradually recedes into the back ground or loses its
significance altogether; whereas the Levitical, the guarding against
defilement, appears more and more in the foreground among the life-long
Nazarites. The Essenes then were such Nazarites as represented in
private life the highest priestly consecration. The connection between
the Nazarites and Essenes has already been indicated in obscure
passages in the Talmud, that one consecrated himself to be a perpetual
Nazarite if he simply wished to be a Nazarite in order that he might be
able to preserve the secrets of disgraceful family circumstances.
(Tosifta Nasir, b. i. 6; Kidushim 71 a.) [95]

1857.—The learned historian Jost, who published the first volume of his
History of Judaism in 1857, was also perfectly convinced by the results
of Frankel’s researches, and made them the basis of his excellent
description of the Essenes, in which he maintains that they grew out of
Pharisaism or from the ancient Chassidim. “The Essenes,” he submits,
“are exactly the same that the other Rabbis wished to be who
endeavoured to practise the Levitical law of purity, as leading to
higher consecration. They have neither another creed nor another law,
but simply institutions peculiar to this brotherhood, and endeavour to
reach the highest consecration by their manner of life, in defining the
different stages, according to preliminary exercises and certain years
of preparation. Their views and tenets are therefore also to be found
in the utterances of the learned and the Rabbis who did not enter their
order, so that they did not look upon the Essenes as opponents or
apostates, but, on the contrary, as holding the same opinions with
increased claims and some fewer enjoyments, whom many out of their own
midst joined, and who were called Chassidim or Zenuim.” [96]

1857.—The comparatively few and unessential deviations from Judaism to
be found in Essenism were, however, more than Herzfeld could tolerate,
without characterising the innovators as heretics and smugglers of
contraband opinions. Dissatisfied with the modern researches of Frankel
and Graetz on this subject, this learned historian, and chief Rabbi of
Brunswick, returned to the old notion of De Rossi, that the Essenes of
Josephus and Philo are identical with the Baithusians mentioned in the
Talmud. Still he thinks that De Rossi’s opinion “must be better proved
than he had done it,” and therefore remarks—“first of all, seeing that
the prefixed ‏בית‎ denotes school or sect in the appellations
Beth-Shammai, Beth-Hillel; that ‏בית הכותים‎ in Tosifta Helem ii. b,
and ‏בי כותאי‎ in Chullin 6 a, denotes the sect or the land of Cuttim;
and then that ‏בית סין‎ stands twice Tosifta Succa, cap. iii., and
Tosifta Menachoth cap. x. for Baithusians, can it mean anything else
than house or sect of Essenes? When ‏אסי‎ physician became the name of
a sect, an Essene could not so well be called ‏אסי‎ without ambiguity;
he was therefore described as one of ‏בית אסי‎.” [97] Thus much for the
origin of the name, and now let us hear Dr. Herzfeld’s theory about the
brotherhood itself. It is simply this [98]—“A Jew, who became
acquainted with the allegorical exegesis prevalent among the
Alexandrian Jews, and with its mother the Greek wisdom, but who, like
Pythagoras, Plato and Herodotus, had also found an opportunity to learn
some things from Egyptian priests, conceived and carried out the plan,
eclectically to form from it and from Judaism a speculative and ascetic
system, as well as to organise, according to its model, a sect from the
Jewish ascetics.” [99] This Alexandrianized Palestinian Jew founded the
order of the Essenes in Palestine about 230 B.C.

1857.—Another effort was made in this year to explain the origin of
this mysterious brotherhood. Professor Hilgenfeld of Jena, who
maintains their genuine Jewish origin, starts the notion that the
Essenes belonged to the Apocalytical school, and that they must be
regarded as the successors of the ancient prophets, and as constituting
the prophetic school. It is only when we view them from this stand
point that their precepts and practices can be understood, and that the
high antiquity ascribed to them by Josephus (Antiq. xviii. 1, 2) and
Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 17), can be comprehended. This he moreover assures
us gives the clue to the explanation of their name. The Hebrew prophets
were also called ‏חזים‎ seers, which, being in the Aramaic
pronunciation ‏חזין‎, easily gave rise through Greek change of vowels
to the name Ἐσσαῖου, Ἐσσηνοί. Hilgenfeld manifests an almost
inexcusable ignorance of the labours of Frankel and Graetz on the
Essenes. [100]

1860.—A necessarily brief but interesting article on the Essenes,
written by the able Mr. Westcott, appeared in Smith’s Dictionary of the
Bible. The writer wisely availed himself of the labours of Frankel and
Jost, and properly traced the origin of the brotherhood to the
Chassidim. His fear, however, lest any shining virtues in the Essenes
might be thought by some to pale some of the brightness of the Sun of
Righteousness, prevented him from appreciating the true character of
this order, as well as from seeing that they paved the way to
Christianity.

1863.—Graetz again, in the second edition of the third volume of his
History of the Jews, in which he has an additional chapter on the Rise
and Progress of Christianity, goes to the other extreme, and maintains
that “Jesus simply appropriated to himself the essential features of
Essenism,” [101] and that primitive Christianity was nothing but an
offshoot from Essenism.

1862.—Of the article on the Essenes in Dr. Alexander’s valuable edition
of Kitto’s Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, being written by me, I
can do no more than say that it embodies the substance of this Essay.

1863.—The description of the Essenes in the new edition of Dean
Milman’s History of the Jews, gives a very imperfect idea both of the
development and morality of this brotherhood. [102] The learned Dean
seems to be wholly unacquainted with the researches of Frankel and
Graetz on this subject. He, however, rightly rejects the notion that
Essenism had its origin in Pythagorism.



1847.—After the above was printed, I found a notice of the Essenes in
Hirschfeld’s work on the Hagadic Exegesis, in which he submits that the
name Essene may be derived from the Greek ἦθος manners, morality,
virtue, that though the Essenes had several things in common with the
Therapeutae, yet there was a great difference between the two sects,
and that the former rested more on the Bible and on Judaism. Still he
affirms that “some Neo-Platonic, Pythagorean and Persian ideas found
their way among the Essenes, and brought with them some practices and
institutions which this brotherhood mixed up with the Jewish views of
religion, and amongst which are to be classed their extension of the
laws of purification, &c.” Hirschfeld, moreover, maintains that, “like
the Alexandrians, but only from a different standpoint, the Essenes
aimed to reconcile religion with science.” As this opinion has already
been discussed in this Essay, it is needless to repeat the objections
against it. [103]








NOTES


[1] According to tradition there were four degrees of purity. 1. The
ordinary purity required of every worshipper in the temple (‏טהרת
חולין‎). 2. The higher degree of purity necessary for eating of the
heave-offering (‏טהרת תרומה‎). 3. The still higher degree requisite for
partaking of the sacrifices (‏טהרת הקודש‎). And 4. The degree of purity
required of those who sprinkle the water absolving from sin (‏טהרת
חטאת‎). Each degree of purity required a greater separation from the
impurities described in Leviticus xi, 24–xv, 28. These impure subjects
were termed the fathers of impurity; that which was touched by them was
designated the first generation of impurity; what was touched by this
again, was called the second generation of impurity; and so on. Now,
heave-offerings—the second degree of holiness—became impure when
touched by the third generation; the flesh of sacrifices—the third
degree of holiness—when coming in contact with the fourth generation;
and so on. These degrees of purity had even to be separated from each
other; because the lower degree was, in respect to the higher one,
regarded as impure, and any one who lived according to a higher degree
of purity became impure by touching one who lived according to a lower
degree, and could only regain his purity by lustrations (‏טבילה‎). The
first degree was obligatory upon every one, the other grades were
voluntary. Before partaking of the heave-offering, the washing of hands
was required; and before eating of the flesh of sacrifices, immersion
of the whole body was required—Comp. Babylonian Talmud, Tract Chagiga,
18 b.

[2] Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. iii, part ii, p. 583 ff.

[3] The figures before each point of comparison do not exit in the
original German; I have inserted them in the translation in order to
facilitate the references to these different points of comparison.

[4] Comp. Diog. Laert. de Vitis Philosophorum, lib. viii. Vit.
Pythagor. xii. It is true that Cicero represents Cotta as giving no
credit to this story, because, as he apprehends, Pythagoras never
offered animal sacrifices (De Natura Deorum, lib. iii. cap. xxxvi.),
but it is also related by Athenaeus (Deipnosoph. lib. x.), Plutarch and
others.

[5] An excellent account of the Pythagorean system is given by Zeller,
Geschichte der Philosophie. Erster Theil, Tübingen, 1856, pp. 206–365;
Grote, History of Greece, vol. iv. London, 1857, pp. 527–553; and
Mason, in Smith’s Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and
Mythology, Article Pythagoras.

[6] R. Nathan, the Babylonian as he is called, was Vice-President of
the College in Palestine, under the Presidency of Simon III. b.
Gamaliel II. A.D. 140. The above-quoted work of which he is the reputed
author, as indicated by its title, ‏אבות דרבי נתן‎ i.e. the Aboth of R.
Nathan, is a compilation of the apothegms and moral sayings of the
Jewish fathers (‏אבות‎), interspersed with traditional explanations of
divers texts of Scripture, consisting of forty-one chapters. Both the
historian and moral philosopher will find this work an important
contribution to the literary and philosophical history of antiquity. It
is printed in the different editions of the Talmud, and has also been
published separately with various commentaries, in Venice, 1622:
Amsterdam, 1778, &c., &c.; and a Latin translation of it was published
by our learned countryman, Francis Taylor, under the title of R.
Nathanis Tractatus de Patribus, latine cum Notis. London, 1654, 4to.
Comp. Zunz, Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden. Berlin, 1832,
p.p. 108, 109; Fürst, Kultur- und Literaturgeschichte der Juden in
Asien. Leipzig, 1849, p. 16 ff; by the same author, Bibliotheca
Judaica, volume iii. Leipzig, 1863, p. 19 ff; Steinschneider, Catalogus
Libr. Hebr. in Bibliotheca Bodleiana col. 2,032 ff.

[7] For the passages embodying the sentiments of the Essenes, which
constitute the above comparisons, we must refer to the second part of
this Essay and the notes.

[8] Compare the account of Philo, p. 36; Pliny, p. 40; Josephus, p. 52;
in the second part of this Essay.

[9] This prophecy is given in full in the second part of this Essay, p.
50.

[10] Zeitschrift für die religiösen Interessen des Judenthums. Berlin,
1856, p. 449.

[11] Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten, vol. 1, Leipzig,
1857, p. 207.

[12] As Mr. Westcott, the writer of the article Essenes in Smith’s
Dictionary of the Bible, has misunderstood this passage and wrongly
represented Jost himself as deriving this name from ‏חשאין‎ the silent,
the mysterious, we give Jost’s own words:—“Uns will scheinen, dass
Josephus den Namen allerdings von ‏חשא‎ schweigen, geheimnissvoll sein,
ableitet; dahin führt seine Uebertragung des Wortes ‏חשן‎ in die
griechischen Buchstaben ἐσσην Ed. Hav. Ant. 1, 147, welches Wort die
LXX λογεῖον übersetzen. Da das Wort ‏חשאין‎ seinen Zeitgenossen sehr
geläufig war, so konnte er annehmen, dass man sich unter dem Namen der
Sekte einen angemessenen Begriff dachte und er keiner Erläuterung
bedürfe. Ja, es wäre möglich, dass er den Begriff aus ‏חשן‎ selbst
ableitet, und auf λογεῖον oder λογίον, als mit Weissagung begabte,
zurückführte. Vergleichte Gfrörer, Philo 1, 196.”

[13] Aboth di. R. Nathan, cap. xxxvi.

[14] Comp. Epiphan. Haeres. xix. lib. i. tom. ii. sect. 4, p. 120, ed.
Petav.

[15] Comp. Petite Variae Lectiones, c. xxviii. p. 2600.

[16] Josippon b. Gorion also called Gorionides, lived in Italy about
the middle of the tenth century. He is the compiler of the celebrated
Hebrew Chronicle called Josippon, or the Hebrew Josephus. His real
character and the value of his Chronicle are discussed under the
article Jossippon in Dr. Alexander’s edition of Kitto’s Cyclopædia of
Biblical Literature.

[17] De Rossi, also called Asarja min Ha-Adomim, was born at Mantua in
1513, and died 1577. For an account of this eminent Jewish scholar, who
may be regarded as the father of Biblical criticism at the time of the
Reformation, see Dr. Alexander’s edition of Kitto’s Cyclopædia of
Biblical Literature, Article Rossi.

[18] Salmas. Plinian. exercitat. in Solinum cap. xxxv. p. 432, edit.
Ultraject.

[19] Comp. Graetz, Geschichte der Juden. Dritter Band, Zweite Auflage,
Leipzig. 1863, p. 464, &c.; Frankel, Programm des jüdisch-theol.
Seminars von 1854.

[20] Comp. Philonis Opera, ed. Mangey. London, 1742, vol. ii pp.
457–45.

[21] Josephus, who also mentions this fact, distinctly says that their
not offering sacrifices in the temple is owing to the different degree
of holiness which they practised. (Vide infra p. 228.) From the
repeated declarations in the Bible, that a life of uniform obedience
and faithful service is far more acceptable to God than the cattle of a
thousand hills (1 Sam. xv. 22; Ps. xl. 7; l. 7–14; li. 17; Prov. xxxi.
3; Isa. i. 11, 17; lxv. 3; Jer. vii. 21–23; Hos. vi. 6; xiv. 3; Micah,
vi. 6–8), the Essenes could easily be reconciled to their abstaining
from offering animal sacrifices, and would be led to attach infinitely
greater importance to the presenting of their bodies a living
sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God. (Comp. also Rom. xii. 1). This
circumstance led Petitius to the conclusion that Herod, who was
friendly to the Essenes in consequence of the favorable prophecy about
him uttered by the Essene Menahem (vide infra p. 50), employed them to
translate the Prophets and the Psalms into Greek, and that they availed
themselves of the opportunity to introduce their tenets and rites into
this version, now called the Septuagint. Thus, for instance, when David
said “Sacrifice and burnt offering thou didst not desire, mine ears
hast thou opened” (Ps. xl. 6), the Essenes rendered it “Sacrifice and
burnt offering thou dost not desire, but a body hast thou prepared me,”
interpolating three of their tenets. 1. They made the Prophet speak
absolutely, as if God had entirely rejected sacrifices because they
would offer him none. 2. By dropping the words, “mine ears hast thou
opened,” they showed their disapprobation of slavery. (Comp. Exod.
xxi). And 3, by substituting “a body hast thou prepared me,” they
understood the college of devout Essenes, who met together as a body,
and whom God appointed instead of sacrifice. Comp. Basnage, History of
the Jews, English translation. London, 1708, p. 128.

[22] This is not the only reason why the Essenes withdrew from cities.
Their observance of the Levitical laws of purity which rendered them
impure when they came in contact with those who did not live according
to the same rules, was the principal cause of their living separately.
(Vide supra p. 7, note 1.) Philo, however, states the first reason
because the Greeks, for whom he wrote, understood it better than the
second, which is so peculiarly Jewish in its character.

[23] The same thing Christ urged on his disciples. Comp. Matth. vi.
19–21.

[24] This simple desire for the supply of our daily bread, and the
contentment of mind here spoken of, are also commended by our Saviour.
(Matth. vi. 11, 25–34.)

[25] Believing that all they that take the sword shall perish with the
sword, Comp. Matth. xxvi. 52.

[26] The Apostle Paul, too, admonished the Colossians to “beware lest
any man spoil you through philosophy.” (Col. ii. 8.)

[27] Thus also Christ, when he was asked which was the greatest
commandment in the law, declared, love to God and love to our
neighbour, and that on these two hang all the law and the prophets.
(Comp. Matth. xxii. 36–40.)

[28] Although the taking of oaths was discountenanced by the Jews
generally (Comp. Ecclus. xxiii 11, &c.; and especially Philo De decem
oraculis § 17, Opp. Tom. ii. p. 194, &c., ed. Mangey); and the
Pharisees took great care to abstain as much as possible from using
them (Comp. Shevuoth 39, b; Gittin 35, a; Bemidbar Rabba c. xxii); yet
the Essenes were the only order who laid it down as a principle not to
swear at all, but to say yea, yea, and nay, nay. So firmly and
conscientiously did they adhere to it that Herod, who on ascending the
throne had exacted an oath of allegiance from all the rest of the Jews,
was obliged to absolve the Essenes from it. (Comp. Joseph. Antiq. book
xv. chap. x. § 4). Christ too, laid it down as a principle for his
disciples not to swear at all, but to say yea, yea, and nay, nay.
(Comp. Matth. v. 38–37.)

[29] This community of goods was also adopted by the early Christians,
who, as we are told, “sold their possessions and goods, and parted them
to all as every man needed.”—(Comp. Acts, ii. 45, iv. 34, 35.)

[30] The account here given of the sufferings of the Essenes bears a
very striking resemblance to the description in the Epistle to the
Hebrews xi. 36–38; and it may be that the Apostle refers to this
extraordinary brotherhood.

[31] This fragment which Eusebius has preserved is given in Philo’s
Works, ed. Mangey, vol. ii., p. 622, seq.

[32] The tracing of this brotherhood to Moses is in accordance with the
practice which generally prevailed among the Jews of ascribing the
origin of every law, mystical doctrine or system, which came into vogue
in the course of time, either to Ezra, Moses, Noah or Adam. Thus we are
told in the Jerusalem Talmud (Pea, ii. 6), and the Midrash (Coheleth,
96 d.), that all the Scriptural learning which developed itself in
course of time, and everything which a Talmid Vatic might bring to
light, were revealed to Moses beforehand on Mount Sinai.

[33] This refers to juvenile members of the fraternity, as the Essenes
did adopt children, and trained them up to the practices of the order.
Vide infra p. 41.

[34] The four companies here mentioned most probably refer to the four
different classes into which the Essenes were divided, described more
minutely by Josephus. Vide infra, p. 47, note 45.

[35] So also the Apostle Paul recommends us not to be slothful in
business, but fervent in spirit, serving the Lord.—(Rom. xii, 11.)

[36] That is if he belongs to the class of Essenes who practised
celibacy; for there were those among them who had wives and families.
Vide infra p. 49.

[37] The Mosaic law regards conjugal intercourse as polluting, and
enjoins bathing after it (Levit. xv. 18.) Hence, when the children of
Israel had to sanctify themselves in the highest degree, so as to be
fit to receive the law from Mount Sinai, they were commanded not to
approach their wives (Exod. xix. 15). Hence, also, those who had the
charge of the shew-bread polluted the sacred loaves by going to their
wives (1 Sam. xxi. 4). And hence the remark of the Apostle Paul, that
in order to give themselves to fasting and prayer, man and wife may
keep aloof from each other by mutual consent (1 Cor. vii. 5). The same
laws obtained among all nations of antiquity. Thus, among the
Egyptians, Babylonians, Arabians, Greeks and Romans, both man and wife
had to bathe after connubial intercourse (Herod., i. 198). No one was
allowed to go after it to the temple without bathing (Herod., ii. 64;
Suet. Aug. xciv. 5; Pers. ii. 50, &c.); and the priests had to abstain
from approaching their wives when they were ministering in holy things
(Porphyrius, de Abstinentia, lib. ii. 50; iv. 7; Plutarch. Sympos. iii.
6; Tibul. lib. ii. Eleg. 1, 11, &c.; Ovid. Metam. x. 434, &c.) Now, as
the Essenes strove to be in a perpetual state of sanctification,
regarded their refectory as a sanctuary and their meals as sacraments,
and most anxiously avoided contact with every thing that defiled, they
had of necessity to extend these Mosaic laws, which enjoin abstinence
from connubial intercourse as a means of sanctification, and which
regard those who indulged in it as defiled, to the whole course of
their life; and they had therefore to be celibates. This extension of
the Mosaic law was moreover deemed desirable in consequence of the
general conviction which the Jews entertained, in common with other
nations, that no woman remains faithful to her husband, and that they
all defile the bed of marriage. Philo, in the passage before us, and
Josephus, as we shall see afterwards (vide infra p. 41, § 2), only give
the latter reason, to suit their Greek readers who could both
understand it better and sympathise with it more than with the former.

[38] This is simply a repetition of what the Essenes themselves said
about their origin, in accordance with a common practice among the
Jews.—Vide supra p. 36, note 14.

[39] This representation of the three Jewish sects as different
philosophical schools, and the supposed resemblance of the Essenes to
the Pythagoreans, which he mentions afterwards, (vide infra Antiq. xv.
10; § 4, p. 50) and which have misled modern writers, are nothing but a
desire on the part of Josephus to make the divers teachings of his
co-religionists correspond to the different systems of Greek
philosophy. It is this anxiety to shew the Gentiles, for whom he wrote,
how much the Jews resemble them both in doctrine and practice, which
detracts from the merits of Josephus’ history.

[40] This love for the brotherhood, which the Essenes possessed to so
extraordinary a degree, was also urged by the Evangelists and Apostles
on the early Christians (comp. John xiv. 17; Rom. xiii. 8; 1 Tim. iv.
9; 1 Peter i. 28; xi. 17; 1 John iii. 23; iv. 7, 11; v. 2).

[41] This does not contradict Philo’s remark (vide supra p. 37), as
Herzfeld supposes, (Geschichte des Volkes Israel, vol. ii. p. 375);
since the two statements refer to two different things. The former
affirms that they do not receive children into the noviciate, whilst
the latter speaks of their adopting and educating them, which is a
distinct thing from becoming a novice.

[42] Vide supra, p. 39, note 19.

[43] So our Lord urged on the young man, who lived so exemplary a life
in the performance of God’s law, and whom he loved, that unless he gave
up his property he could not follow him (comp. Matth. xix. 21; Mark x.
21; Luke xviii. 22), and commanded his disciples to sell all their
possessions and distribute the money among the poor (comp. Luke xii.
33.)

[44] Ointment being a luxury (comp. Eccl. ix. 8; Dan. x. 2), the
Essenes regarded the use of it as extravagance, and contrary to the
simplicity of their manner of life.

[45] The manner in which Christ commanded his disciples to depart on
their journey (Mark vi. 8–10) is the same which these pious Essenes are
here said to have adopted. This also explains the injunction given by
our Saviour to his disciples in Luke xxii. 36, about taking arms with
them, which has so greatly perplexed commentators who were unacquainted
with the customs of the Essenes.

[46] The Pharisees, too, had a steward in every place to supply the
needy with clothing and food. (Comp. Pea viii. 7; Baba Bathra 8 a;
Sabbath 118.)

[47] Comp. also Luke x. 4, &c.

[48] Some translate it “they offer prayer (εἰς τὸν ἥλιον) to the sun.”
But it is utterly inconceivable that the Essenes, who were such
thorough Jews, and so exemplary for their adoration of the Holy One of
Israel, would be guilty of idolatry by worshipping the sun. Besides,
the prayer in question is described as one transmitted by the fathers.
And can it be imagined that there existed among the Jews a national
prayer to this luminary in direct violation of the first commandment,
and of what is so expressly forbidden in Deut. iv. 10? The prayer
therefore here spoken of is the well known national morning hymn of
praise (‏המאיר לארץ‎) for the return of the light of the day, which
still forms a part or the Jewish service to the present day. Comp.
Berachoth 9 b; Rappaport in the Bikure Ha-Ittim, vol. x., Vienna 1829,
p. 115, and infra p. 69.

[49] This practice of bathing before meals was also common among the
Pharisees (comp. Chagiga, 18, b), and as the Essenes covered themselves
with their aprons so the Pharisees put on their Talith during their
baptisms. (Comp. Berachoth 24, b.)

[50] The Pharisees, too, regarded the refectory as a sanctuary, and
compared its table to the altar in the temple, because the altar in the
temple is represented as the table of the Lord (Ezekiel xli, 22).
Hence, R. Jochanan and R. Eleazar remark—“As long as the temple stood
the altar atoned for the sins of Israel, but now it is man’s table
which atones for his sins.” (Talmud Berachoth, 55a). Hence the Chaldee
paraphrase of Ezekiel xii. 22, and the remarks of Rashi and Kimchi on
this passage, which cannot be understood unless this traditional
interpretation is borne in mind. Comp. also Aboth iii, 3.

[51] This was also the practice of the Pharisees, and is to the present
day the custom among the orthodox Jews.

[52] This paragraph almost embodies the sentiments uttered by our
Saviour in Matth. chap. v.

[53] These ancient books on magical cures and exorcisms were the
reputed works of Solomon, who, according to the Talmud as well as the
Byzantine and Arabian writers, composed treatises on miraculous cures
and driving out evil spirits. (Comp. Pesachim 56 a; Fabricius, Codex
pseudepigraphus Vet. Test. p. 1042, &c.; Weil, Biblische Legenden der
Muselmänner, p. 225–279). Josephus tells us elsewhere that some of
these Solomonic productions still existed in his own days, and that he
had actually seen demons driven out and people cured by their aid.
(Comp. Antiq. book viii. chap. ii. § 5.) This account most strikingly
illustrates what Christ says in Matth. xii. 27.

[54] This custom has its origin in the extension of a Mosaic law. The
hosts of the Lord are commanded in Deut. xxiii 13, 15, to have spades
among the martial instruments in order to bury therewith their
excrements without the camp, and thus to keep themselves pure from
every pollution, and to be a holy camp, because the Holy One of Israel
dwells in the midst thereof. Now as the Essenes strove to be, in a
pre-eminent sense, the spiritual hosts of the Lord, every one of them
was obliged to have this spade in order to guard their sacred camp from
defilement. For this reason the apron was also given to cover their
nakedness in their numerous baptisms, and thus to keep their thoughts
from dwelling upon anything which might lead to impurity; whilst the
white garment was the symbol of their holiness. This, however, was not
peculiar to the Essenes, as the Talmud tells us that when any one
applied to become a member of the Pharisaic order (‏חבר‎), he had to
pass through a noviciate of twelve months, at the expiration of which
he received a sort of garment called ‏כנפים‎, and having duly qualified
himself in this stage, he was afterwards admitted to the holier
lustrations (‏מקבלין לכנסּים ואחר כד מקבלין לטהרות‎). (Comp. Tosifta
Demai e. 11; Jerusalem Demai ii. 3; Babylonian Becharoth 30, 6).

[55] This was the only occasion on which the Essenes were permitted to
take an oath.

[56] This does not refer to governments generally, as Gfrörer will have
it (Philo und die jüdisch-alexandrinische Theosophie, vol. ii, p. 333,
&c.), but to the office of overseer or steward among the brotherhood,
as is evident from the immediately following statement, which most
unquestionably pledges every Essene to retain his simplicity of
character if he should ever attain to any official position or
stewardship in the order.

[57] This is not peculiar to the Essenes. The Pharisees, too, would not
indiscriminately propound the mysteries of the cosmogony and the
theosophy, which, according to them, are contained in the history of
the Creation and in the vision of Ezekiel, except to those who were
regularly initiated in the order. Comp. Mishna Chagiga, ii, 1.

[58] This evidently refers to the secrets of the Tetragrammaton, and
the angelology which played so important a part among the Jewish
mystics from time immemorial. Comp. Wisdom of Solomon vii. 20; Mishna
Chagiga, ii, 1.

[59] The reason why he ate herbs and not bread, or the simple dish
which the order generally took, is that, being bound by an oath to
observe the practices of the brotherhood, he could only accept meals
from those who lived according to the highest degree of purity (‏על
טהרת חטאת‎), and who, as a matter of course, kept their meals according
to this degree. But as such a mode of life was of very uncommon
occurrence, the excommunicated Essene was obliged to live on herbs or
vegetables which he had to pluck himself; for, according to the Talmud,
plants are only then considered unclean when they are cut off and water
is poured upon them (‏משהוכשרו לקבל טומאה משנתלשו‎). As for Josephus’
saying that he died a miserable death, and that he could only eat grass
(ποιηφάγων), this is simply another instance of his exaggerating and
colouring his subject.

[60] The Pharisees, too, regarded ten persons as constituting a
complete number for divine worship, held the assembling of such a
number as sacred, and would not spit in their presence. (Comp.
Berâchoth 51 a; Jerusalem Berachoth iii. 5; Aboth iii. 6.)

[61] This is not peculiar to the Essenes; for the Pharisees, too, would
not remove a vessel on the Sabbath (comp. Tosifta Succa, iii); and the
orthodox Jews, to the present day, will not even carry a handkerchief
on the Sabbath; they tie it round the body to serve as a girdle, so
that it might not be said that they carry the weight of even so small a
thing on the sacred day. Comp. also Mark xi, 16.

[62] Neither is this peculiar to the Essenes; for not only did the
Pharisees of old do the same (comp. Ioma 28, a); but the orthodox Jews
of the present day wash after performing the duties of nature.

[63] This division of the brotherhood into four classes, as well as the
impurity contracted by the higher class when touching one who belonged
to a lower class of purity, also existed among the Pharisees. (Vide
supra, p. 7, note 1.)

[64] Philo, too, speaks of this fact. (Vide supra p. 36.)

[65] This is another instance of the anxiety of Josephus to make the
different phases of Judaism harmonise with the Greek mode of thinking.

[66] It is evident that Josephus, as an orthodox and pious Jew, cannot
mean by εἱμαρμένη the Fatum of the Stoics, which was above the deities;
but intends to convey thereby the idea of eternal counsels and
predestination spoken of in the Bible. Indeed, elsewhere Josephus tells
us distinctly that “the doctrine of the Essenes delights to leave all
things to God” (vide infra p. 52); so that that which is in the one
case ascribed to fate, is in the other ascribed to God.

[67] No more regard is to be paid to this remark, that the Essenes are
like the Pythagoreans, than to the assertion which Josephus makes
afterwards that they are related in their manner of life to the
Polistae, (vide infra p. 53), as his aim was to shew how much the
Jewish sects resembled the Greek systems of philosophy. Comp. p. 41,
note 21.

[68] The fact that Menahem saw Herod in Jerusalem, and that the Essene
Judah, as Josephus tells us elsewhere (comp. Jewish War, book i. chap.
iii. § 5; Antiq. book xiii. chap. xi. § 2), foretold in the temple the
death of Antigones, clearly shows that the Essenes did not at first
form a separate community, but lived together with the rest of their
Jewish brethren.

[69] Pliny, whom Solinus copies, simply says that the Essenes live in
the society of palm-trees (socia palmarum), to form an antithesis with
the appellation a solitary community (sola gens); and this is perfectly
correct. But Solinus’ alteration of it into “palm-berries are their
food” (palmis victitant) is incorrect, inasmuch as they lived from the
cultivation of the land, bees, &c.

[70] This is simply a reiteration of what Pliny says about the
antiquity of the Essenes.

[71] This work of Josephus, addressed to the Greeks, is no longer
extant.

[72] This is simply imaginary; the real reason for it was, that they
could not dig on the Sabbath the hole that was requisite for it
without, as they thought, violating the sanctity of the day, as to do
so was considered a labour.

[73] This unjust remark about the Essenes, whose exemplary virtues and
self-denying life elicited the unqualified admiration of Jews, Greeks,
and Romans, is just what might be expected from the bigoted persecutor
of heretics, amongst whom he put no less a person than St. Chrysostom.

[74] This name may be derived from the Hebrew Shemesh (‏שמש‎) sun, and
was most probably given to the Essenes, because of the erroneous notion
that they worshipped the sun.

[75] The whole of this account is worse than useless, inasmuch as it
not only gives us no information whatever about this interesting order,
but is positively misleading.

[76] Comp. Meor Enajim, edit. Mantua. 1547, fol. 88 b.

[77] ‏אנטיגנוס איש סוכו קבל משמעון הצדיק הוא היה אמר אל תהיו כעבדים
המשמשים את הרב על מנת לקבל פרס אלא היו כעברים המשמשים את הרב שלא על מנת
לקבל פרס ויהי מורא שמיס עליכם כדי שיהיה שכרכם כפול: לעתיד לבא: אנטיגנוס
איש סוכו היו לו שני תלמידים שהיו שונין בדבריו שונין היו לתלמידים
ותלמידים לתלמידיהם עמרו ודקדקו אחריהן ואמרו מה ראו אבותינו לומר אפשר
שיעשה פועל מלאכה כל היום ולא יטול שכרו ערבית אלא אילו יודעין אבותינו
שיש העולם (אחר) ויש תחיית המתים לא היו אומרים כך עמדו ופירשו מי התורה
ונפרצו מהם שתי פרצות צדוקים וביתוסין צדוקים על שום צדוק ביתוסין על שום
ביתוס שהיה משתמש בכלי זהב וכלי כסף כל ימיו לא היתה דעתו גסה עליו אלא
צדוקים אומרים מסורה בית פרושים שהן מצערין עצמן בעולם הזה ובעולם הבא אין
להם כלום‎

[78] Comp. Moses and Aaron: Civil and Ecclesiastical Rites used by the
Ancient Hebrews, eighth edition (London, 1672), book i, chap, xii, p.
50–59.

[79] The Court of the Gentiles. Pt. ii of “Philosophy,” Oxford, 1671,
p. 147, &c.

[80] The Old and New Testaments Connected, seventeenth editions, vol.
iii. London, 1815, part ii, book v, p. 406–431.

[81] The History of the Jews, from Jesus Christ to the present day.
London, 1708, p. 125–137.

[82] Jewish Antiquities; or a Course of Lectures on the two first books
of Godwyn’s Moses and Aaron, ninth edition. London, 1837, book i.,
chap. xii, p. 281–287.

[83] Geschichtliche Nachrichten aus dem Alterthume über Essäer und
Therapeuten. Berlin, 1821.

[84] General History of the Christian Religion and Church, English
Translation, Clark’s Theological Library, vol. i, Edinburgh, 1851, p.
58–66.

[85] Rappaport, in the Hebrew Annual, entitled Bikure Ha-Ittim, vol. x,
Vienna, 1829, p. 118 ff.

[86] Comp. Kritische Geschichte des Urchristenthums. 1 Theil Philo und
die jüdish-alexandrianische Theosophie, 11 Abtheilung. Stuttgart, 1835.
p. 299–356.

[87] Diese Trennung nun aber unter ben Anhängern der
jüdisch-alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie selbst in solche, welche
sich ausschliesslich dem beschaulichen und in Andere, welche sich
vorzugsweise dem praktischen Leben widmeten, ist es eben, welche sich
in unserem fraglichen Doppelorden auch äusserlich repräsentirte,
sodass, wenn schon beide ganz auf derselben philosophischen Unterlage
ruhten, die Therapeuten sich möglichst ausschliesslich und unmittelbar
dem höchsten von ihnen angestrebten menschlichen Lebensziele, der
Anschauung Gottes selbst, hingaben, während die Essäer gewissermassen
freiwillig in dem Vorhofe zum Allerheiligsten zögernd, sich absichtlich
und zum Besten der Brüder häufiger in Berührung setzten mit dem
Sinnlichen, als es die Naturnothwendigkeit foderte und so ihre eigene
höchste Vollkommenheit und Seligkeit zwar grossmuthig, aber gewiss auch
unphilosophisch genug augenblicklich noch verkümmerten.

[88] Comp. Ersch und Gruber’s Allgemeine Encyklopädie, section i. vol.
xxxviii, p. 173–192.

[89] Comp. Frankel, Zeitschrift für die religiösen Interessen des
Judenthums, vol. iii. Berlin, 1846, p. 441–461.

[90] Comp. The Biblical Repository and Classical Review. New York,
1847, p. 162–173.

[91] Geschichte des Volkes Israel, Vierter Band. Göttingen, 1852, p.
419–428.

[92] Comp. Monatschrift für Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judenthums,
Zweiter Jahrgang. Leipzig, 1853, p. 30–40; 61–73.

[93] Ich nehme diese auf kritischer Forschung, beruhenden Resultate
über diese Secte vollständig an und werde nur noch einige Pünkte
nachträglich beleuchten.

[94] Die Eigenthümlichkeiten der Essäer lassen sich nicht genügend aus
dem Wesen der im Talmud vorkommenden ‏חסידים‎ oder ‏חסידים הראשנים‎ und
der in der Makkabäerzeit auftretenden “Assidäer” erklären; man muss
auch auf das nasiräische Wesen Rücksicht nehmen. Nasiräer gab es in der
nachexilischen Zeit eine grosse Menge (Tosifta Nasir c. iv. Babli
Berachot 48 a. 1 Makkab. ii, 49. Jos. Alterth. xviii, 6, 1). Aber sie
trugen zugleich einen andern Charakter, als die der biblischen Zeit:
sie waren Nasiräer fürs ganze Leben ‏נזיר עולם‎ (Nasir 4 a). Die
Mischna setzt das Vorhandensein solcher ohne Weiteres voraus, und das
Magische an dem Nasiräerthum, das sich bei den biblischen Nasiräern an
den Haarwuchs knüpfte, tritt immer mehr zurück, oder hat vielmehr gar
keine Bedeutung mehr. ‏נזיר עולם הכביד שערו מיקל בשער‎ (das.). Hingegen
tritt bei den lebenslänglichen Nasiräern das Levitische, die Hut vor
Verunreinigung, immer mehr in den Vordergrund (das.). Die Essäer werden
also solche Nasiräer gewesen sein, welche in ihrem Privatleben die
höchste priesterliche Weihe darstellen wollten. Den Zusammenhang
zwischen Nasiräern and Essäern deutet schon eine dunkle talmudische
Stelle an, dass Jemand sich dadurch schon dem vollständigen Nasireat
weiht, wenn er auch nur insofern Nasiräer sein will, um die Geheimnisse
entehrender Familienverhältnisse bewahren zu können: ‏הריני נזיר אם לא
אגלה משפחות הרי זו נזיר ולא יגלה משפחות‎ (Tosifta Nasir c. 1 b
Kiduschim 71 a). Die Erklärung dieser Stelle durch den Essenismus hat
schon Edeles (‏מהרש״א‎) in seinem Agadacommentar z. St. geahnt. Diesen
Zusammenhang zwischen Nasiräerthum und Essenismus haben Epiphanius und
die arabischen Schriftsteller Makrisi und Abulfarag’ geahnt; wenn auch
Epiphanius die Ναζαραῖοι von den Ὀσσηνοί unterscheidet, so sind die
Eigenheiten, die er von den Erstern berichtet, doch ganz essäisch.
Ebenso hat Makrisi die Essäer in drei Secten zerspalten, in die Täufer
(‏מנטהרון‎ = ἡμεροβαπτισταί), die Essäer (‏אסאניון‎) und in die
Nasiräer (‏מתחשפון‎) (in de Sacy Chrestomathie Arabe Ausgabe von 1806,
arabischer Theil 172 und tome ii, 218). Das arabische Makkabäerbuch
bezeichnet die Essäer durch Chassidäer (c. xxv); in Josippon fehlen an
der Stelle, wo er von den drei Secten spricht, gerade die Essäer (iv,
6, Breithaupt) Die Identität von Nasiräern, Essäern und Assidäern wird
also von vielen Seiten bestätigt. Auch aus Josephus’ Angabe, die Essäer
hätten eigne Bücher gehabt (jüd. Kr. ii, 8, 7), lässt sich ihre
Identität mit den Assidäern erweisen. Im Talmud (Jeruschalmi Barachot,
Ende) wird aus einem Buchs der Chassidäer der Satz mitgetheilt:
“Verlässt du sie einen Tag, so verlässt sie dich zwei Tage”: ‏כתוב בספר
חסידים אם תעובה יום יומים תעובך‎

[95] Geschichte der Juden, vol. iv. Leipzig, 1856, p. 96–106; 518–528.

[96] Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten, vol. 1. Leipzig,
1857, p. 207–215.

[97] Die Essäer waren die Baitusim, wie schon R. Asarja de’ Rossi
vermuthet hat; es muss dies nur besser begründet werden, als von ihm
geschehen ist. Ich bemerke zu dem Ende erstens, dass wie das
vorgesetzte ‏בית‎ auch in den Benennungen Bet-Schammaj, Bet-Hillel
Schule oder Fraction bedeutet, so Tosifta Kelim ii, 6 ‏בית הכותים‎,
Chulin 6, a ‏בי כותאי‎ für die Sekte oder das Land der Cutim vorkommt;
sodann dass Tosifta Succa, K. iii zweimal und Tosifta Menachot K. z.
für Baitusim ‏בית סין‎ stehet: kann dies wohl etwas Anderes als Haus,
Sekte der Essener bedeuten? Als ‏אסי‎ (Arzt) Sektenname wurde, konnte
man den Essäer nicht gut mehr schlechthin ‏אסי‎ nennen, ohne undeutlich
zu werden, man umschrieb ihn daher wohl als Einen vom ‏בית אסי‎,
bildete danach auch mit Zugrundelegung der Form Essener, das
nachgewiesene ‏בית סין‎ and zog dann Jenes zusammen, um den einzelnen
Essäer zu bezeichnen, gab aber dieser Form den u-Laut, entweder nachdem
man das syrische Wort ‏אסי‎ zuweilen nach syrischer Weise ôsseh, also
dunkel ausgesprochen hatte, woher die Aussprache Ossener bei Epiphanius
herrühren mag, oder was mir noch wahrscheinlicher ist, indem man dem
Worte Peruschim conform Zedukim und Baitusim bildete.

[98] Nach allem diesen scheint es, dass ein Jude, welcher mit der unter
den alexandrinischen Juden aufblühenden allegorischen Exegese und mit
deren Erzeugerin, der griechischen Weisheit, bekannt geworden war,
daneben aber auch Gelegenheit gefunden hatte, von ägyptischen Priestern
Manches zu lernen, wie Pythagoras selbst, Platon und Herodot, den Plan
gefasst und ausgeführt habe, eklektisch hieraus und aus dem Judenthume
ein speculatives und asketisches System sowie nach demselben aus
judäischen Asketen eine Sekte zu bilden. Dass es an Solchen nicht
gefehlt habe, verbürgt das Vorkommen von Nasiräern, z. B. nach Tosifta
Nasir K. iv unter Schimon dem Gerechten, ferner 1 Mack. iii, 49, und
von ihrer 300 auf einmal unter Schimon ben Schatach nach Nasir jer. v,
3. Dass er aber nicht mit jüdischen Asketen in Ägypten diesen Versuch
machte, geschah vielleicht, weil es damals dort noch an solchen Asketen
fehlte, oder weil er selbst aus Judäa gebürtig sein mochte.

[99] Geschichte des Volkes Israel von Vollendung des Zweiten Tempels
bis zur Einsetzung des Mackabäers Schimon zum hohen Priester und
Fürsten, Zweiter Band. Nordhausen, 1857, p. 368–377; 387–409.

[100] Die jüdische Apokalyptik in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwickelung.
Jena, 1857, p. 245–278.

[101] Geschichte der Juden, Dritter Band Zweite Auflage. Leipzig, 1863,
p. 216–252.

[102] The History of the Jews from the earliest period down to modern
times. London, 1863, vol. ii. p. 110–115.

[103] “Sie lieferte zwar nicht wissenschaftliche Resultate, aber ihr
Leben deutet sattsam darauf hin, dass ihre Bestrebungen darauf
gerichtet waren, wie in Alexandrien, nur von einem andern Standpunct
ans, die Religion und die Wissenschaft zu versöhnen.” Der Geist der
ersten Schriftauslegungen order: Die hagadische Exegese. Berlin, 1847,
p. 114, &c.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 69170 ***