The Religion of Israel Before Sinai

8/3/2019 The Religion of Israel Before Sinai

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-religion-of-israel-before-sinai 1/29

Center for Advanced Judaic Studies, University of Pennsylvania

The Religion of Israel before SinaiAuthor(s): M. H. SegalReviewed work(s):Source: The Jewish Quarterly Review, New Series, Vol. 52, No. 1 (Jul., 1961), pp. 41-68Published by: University of Pennsylvania PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1453274 .

Accessed: 16/11/2011 00:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of Pennsylvania Press and Center for Advanced Judaic Studies, University of Pennsylvania are

collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Jewish Quarterly Review.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upenn

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1453274?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1453274?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upenn



THE RELIGION OF ISRAEL BEFORE SINAI

by M. H. SEGAL, Hebrew University, Jerusalem

ABRAHAM AND NOT Moses was the founder of Israel's

monotheism. Mosesgave Israel the Torahwith its command-

ments, but her God Israel inherited from the patriarchs.

This is an oft-repeatedassertionin Israel's biblical and post-

biblical literature and it is no doubt based upon a historicalfact. Nowhere do we find the designation of God as the God

of Moses. God is always described as the God of Abraham

and of Isaac and of Jacob and after them as the God of Israel.

Already Abraham's servant spoke of God as Yhwh the God

of Abraham (Gen. 24, I2 24 27 42 48). Yhwh reveals Himself

to Isaac as the God of Abraham his father (Gen. 26, 24), and

to Jacob as the God of his father Abraham and of Isaac

,(Gen. 28, I3), and thus Jacob addresses Yhwh as "the God

of my father Abraham and the God of my father Isaac"

(32, io), and he offers sacrifices to Him as the God of his

father Isaac (46, i), andconfersa blessingon Joseph's children

in the name of the God of his fathers, Abraham and Isaac

(48, i6).The children of Jacob brought to Egypt the faith in the

God of the patriarchs and preserved its memory until thedays of Moses. This is implied in the divine promiseto Jacob:

"I will go down with thee to Egypt and I will also surely

bring thee up again" (Gen. 46, 4). At the beginning of Israel's

life in Egypt the sons of Jacob style themselvesin their address

to Joseph "the servants of the God of thy father" (50, I7).

And so at the end of Israel's life in Egypt God reveals Himself

to Mosesin the vision of the bush with the words: "I am theGod of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,

and the God of Jacob", and He commands Moses to declare

to Israel: "Yhwh the Godof your fathers,the God of Abraham

the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto

4



42 THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

you" (Ex. 3, 6 I5). This first divine revelation to Moses at

Sinai did not thereforeproclaimto Mosesa new and hitherto

unknown God, or even a new conception with a new name

of God (as asserted by the critics).'The revelationin the vision

of the bush only proclaimed the redemption of Israel from

Egypt by the God of their fathers and the fulfillment of the

divine promise to their fathers of the gift of the land of

Canaan. And when Moses and Aaron delivered to the Israe-

lites the divine message they did not talk of a new God or evenof a new name of God,but only of the redemption which alone

was contained in the message: "And the people believed and

they heard that Yhwh had visited the children of Israel and

that He had looked upon their affliction"(Ex 4, 3I). Likewise

the great revelation to all Israel for the covenant of Sinai did

not proclaim a new God or a new name of God or a new

conceptionof God.It

only recalledthe redemptionfromEgyptpromisedin the vision of the bush: "I am Yhwh thy Godwho

hath brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house

of bondage" (Ex. 20, 2), and in consequenceof the redemption

it announcedthe injunctionsof the decalogueand the follow-

ing 'judgments'and laws which formed the terms and condi-

tions of the covenant (Ex. 2I-23; 24). It is clear therefore

that the Pentateuch (andso also the rest of the Hebrew bible

and the rest of Hebrew literature) does not know of theproclamation by Moses of a new God or of a new name of

God. Moses came to Israel as the messenger of Yhwh the

God of Abrahamand Isaac and Jacob, and in the name of this

God of the ancestorsdid he lead Israel out of Egypt and con-

cludedwith them the covenant of Sinai which laid upon them

the laws and commands of the Torah. Abraham is thus the

first father of Israel's faith as he is the founder of the nationof Israel.

How did Abrahamin the midst of his pagan environment

attain to so lofty a conception and for his days so abstruse a

1 Cf. my study on the revelation of the name Yhwh in my 1l1TjIITlN321 (1957), P. 47ff.



RELIGION OF ISRAEL-SEGAL 43

doctrine as the unity of the divine ? For it cannot be said

that in his clan or in his family there was a tendency or adisposition favoring the development of such a doctrine.

Abraham's family was not different from its neighbours in

faith and worship. "Your fathers dwelt of old on the other

side of the river (Euphrates) and they served other gods"

(Jos. 24, 2). Terahwas the father of Abrahamand of Nachor.

Abraham's family first dwelt at Ur of the Chaldees and

then moved toHarran (Gen. II, 31). Both these places were

then the great centres of the worship of Sin, the moon god,

and it may be presumed that Abraham's family were also

devoted to the worshipof the moon. The name of Abraham's

father Terah (nrrn)s plausibly associated with the name of

the moon Yerah (nnr) and the name of Abraham's wife

Sarah (Sarai, "i-, nn', the princess) is identical with the

title of the consort of the moon god.' The devotion of his

family to this idolatry may have been the true reason forAbraham's departure from Mesopotamniand his settlement

in Canaan. His new faith must have made it impossible for

him to continue to live together with his pagan kinsmen.

Though his separationfrom them was not complete; he kept

in Canaanhis contact with at Harran(Gen.22, 20). The moral

standard of his famnilywas higherthan that of his neighbors

in Canaan. For this reason he opposed the marriage of hisson Isaac to a Canaanitishwoman and ordered his servant

to fetch a wife for Isaac fromhis kindredat Harran(Gen. 24).

Similarly in the following generation Esau's Canaanitish

wives were a cause of grief to Isaac and Rebekah, and they

ordered Jacob to go to Harran and marry into Laban's

family (Gen. 26, 35; 27, 46; 28, I-2). But Abraham refused

to let Isaac go to Harran for such a purpose (24, 6 8) for fear

lest Isaac with his softer nature might be influenced by the

1 Cf. U. Cassuto, From Noah to Abraham (Hebrew), p. I50 I56;

H. Zimmern, Keilingschriften u. das AT (I903), p. 364. In the Ugariticepos of Keret Terah is a divinity of the Negeb, the enemy of Keret;cf. R. Dussaud, Mana II La Religion des Pheniciens (I945), p. 367.




idolatry of his family and rendervoid the divine promise for

his future.How then did Abraham attain in his pagan home to the

sublime truth of the unity of God? This question already

exercisedthe mindsof the ancients, and they invented various

tales for its explanation.' But they all agreed that Abraham

did not learn this truth from a predecessor.He evolved it by

his own contemplation, from his own intuition, guided by a

divine inspiration. This may indeed be the true answer tothe question. Abrahamis only one example of many similar

phenomena in the history of humanity's development to a

higher life. He is one of the noble elect, founders of world

religions, prophets of new truths, great reformers,who were

seized by an overpoweringideal and were made the instru-

ments of man's spiritual advancement. Abraham described

his election in religious terms: "Yhwh the God of heaven

who took me from my father's house and from the land of

my kindred", etc. (Gen. 24, 7). Thus it is also said: "And I

took your father, even Abraham,from the other side of the

river" (Jos. 24, 3). This taking is equivalent to a choice and a

seizure, to a separation from one's environment and to a

consecration to a particular purpose. Similarly, Moses said

to Israel: "And you Yhwh hath taken (out of all the peoples)

to be unto Him a people of His Inheritance" (Deut. 4, 20).It may be assumedthat Abraham'sconversionto the faith

in the One God had already taken place during his residence

at Ur, and that while still at Ur he planned to emigrate to

distant Canaan.This is impliedin the statement: "I am Yhwh

who brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldeesto give thee this

land to inherit it" (Gen. I5, 7). Life in Mesopotamiaat the

beginningof the second milleniummust have been intolerable

to a believer in the One God. The whole life of society and of

the individual was strictly regulated on the principles of a

1 Cf. Jubilees, ch. I2, and the stories in the late Midrashim, Yellinek,Beth Hamidrash, I, p. 25ff.; Eisenstein, Ozar Midrashim, i, p. iff.;

Jew. Encyc. i, p. 8sff.




crass polytheism and demonology, governed by a multitude

of priests, diviners and magiciansunder the rule of the greattemples and their hierarchies. There was no room in that

Mesopotamia for an individual who could not join in the

worship and in the magical practices of his fellows. Abraham

must have felt early the pressingneed to remove himself from

such a stifling environment. He may have longed to emigrate

to a land like distant Canaan, situated on the outer fringe

of Mesopotamian civilization, only sparsely populated by avariety of small communities of different descent and different

traditions, all preserving side by side their different dentities.

In such a land he would be able to cultivate his new-found

faith and establish a society based on the worship of the One

true God. It must have been this vision which urged him to

exchange rich and fertile Mesopotamia or the poor and barren

Negeb of distant Canaan. While still under the tutelage of

his father he seems to have persuaded his father to emigratefrom Ur to Canaan (Gen.II, 3I). When they reached Harran,

which like Ur was a centre of the worship of the moon, they

broke their journey and remained there apparently for many

years. We do not know the cause of their stay at Harran

(where Abraham's brother Nachor seems to have settled

earlier),or how long their stay there lasted. But at last Abra-

ham resumedhis journeyto Canaan, eaving his father behindhim at Harran. The bible relates that Abraham's departure

from Harran was at the bidding of a divine command to

leave his father's house and his kindred and go to the land

appointed for him where a glorious future awaited him (Gen.

I2, I-2). Thus Abraham arrived n Canaanwith his dependents

and settled in the south country and in the Negeb where he

became known as a 'godly prince' and a prophet (Gen. 23,

6; 20, 7). He established the worship of God in his family,

passing on his faith to his son Isaac, who in his turn passed

on the faith of Abraham to his son Jacob, and Jacob be-

queathed the faith to his twelve sons who brought it with

them to Egypt.




II. THE BOOK OF GENESIS AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

Our study of the religion of Abraham is based entirely on

the book of Genesis. But in view of the current theory of

biblical criticism which denies both the integrity and the

historicity of the book, it behoves us to justify our use of the

book in the following sections as a source of material for our

study. Modern criticism considers the book of Genesis as

well as the rest of the Pentateuch to be a combination of

fragments of a varied and generally late origin blended

together by a succession of late editors reaching down to

post-exilic times. The contents of the book are held to be a

mass of myths and legends reflecting late conditions and

events all projectedbackwards nto the distant and unknown

age of the legendary patriarchs. I have elsewhere submitted

this theory to a detailed criticism which proved it to be

fallacious.' Here it may be sufficient to state briefly theconclusionof that criticism that, with the exception of some

unimportant additions, the book of Genesis is a work of a

unitary character composed by one author who derived his

materials from the living tradition of his day. The stories of

the patriarchs in Genesis are a trustworthy record of the

lives and the acts and fortunes of real living persons as con-

ceived in the imaginative artistry of a noble writer who wasan inspired teacher of the ethical monotheism of the Torah.

The book of Genesis is an organic part of the Pentateuch.

Its principal theme is that which is developed in the four

following books, viz. the election of Israel by the covenant

with the patriarchsto becomethe peopleof Godin its divinely-

appointed home, the land of Canaan. The book describes

the antecedents of Israel from the creation of the world to

the death of Jacob and Joseph. The first section of the book

dealing with primeval times (ch. i-II) has a distinctly Meso-

1 Masoreth u-Biqqoreth, p. I-I25; also JQR, vol. xlvi, p. 89-iI5;

vol. xlviii, p. 315-349, and my forthcoming essay The Composition

of the Pentateuch in the Studies in the Bible, Studia Hierosolymitana,viii.




potamian background,as is demonstrated by the Mesopota-

mian coloring of the story of Eden and its rivers, of theflood, of the tower of Babel, by the names of many of the

primeval patriarchs,and by the account of the beginnings of

Abraham himself. It may therefore be reasonably assumed

that these stories in the first section of the book are based

upon Mesopotamianmaterialbroughtto Canaanby Abraham

himself whichhe purifiedfrom its pagan dross and refashioned

in the spirit of his monotheisticfaith and handed it down as aliving tradition to his descendants.

Mesopotamian civilization continues its influence also in

the second section of the book describingthe lives of the three

patriarchs (ch. I2-35).1 This is evident in the family affairs

of Abraham with Sara and Hagar and Ishmael and Isaac

which are conducted in accordance with the established legal

customs of Mesopotamia, n the marriagesof Isaac and Jacob,

and in the whole of Jacob's life in Harran.The stories in thissecond section must have been fashioned and formulated

while the memory of the Mesopotamianinfluence was still

active and fresh in Israel, and before family relationships

were modified by changed conditions and by the influence

of the Mosaic law. It may therefore be assumed that these

stories originated contemporaneously with the age of the

patriarchsand handed down as a living traditionin the familyof Jacob and its Israelite descendants in Egypt.

Finally the exquisite tale of Joseph and his brethrenin the

third and last section of the book (ch. 37-50) must surelyhave

been founded on the living tradition of Israel in Egypt prior

to the exodus. At no other period in Israel's history (except

perhapsin the last days of the kingdom of Judah when Judah

had close connections with Egypt) could there have existed

in Israel such a familiarity with Egyptian manners and

1 Gen. ch. 36 looks like an orginally Edomite document which mayhave been incorporated in the book in the days of David or Solomonwhen Israel came into close contact with Edom; cf. IISam. 8, I3-15;

I Kings ii, I5-i6.




customs as displayed in this section. In no other period could

there have been such a deep interest of the narratorhimselfand of his public in the many persoanl touches and details

in the long-drawn out drama of Joseph as during Israel's

enslavement in Egypt. At no other time would such repeated

emphasis have been laid on Pharaoh's invitation to Jacob

and his sons to come and settle in Egypt, on Pharaoh'spro-

mises of honorable and liberal treatment of the immigrants

as the King's guests (Gen. 45, I7-20; 47, 6), or on the greatservices rendered to Egypt and to Pharaoh by Joseph (ch.

4I; 47). The emphasis on these details becomes intelligible

and appropriate f it voices a bitter protest against the breach

of the royal promise and against the ingratitude for the

services of Joseph involved in the harsh policy of oppression

by the Pharaoh "who knew not Joseph" (Ex. I, 8).

We thus reach the conclusion that the book of Genesis

embodies the living traditions of Israel in Egypt, and may

well be a work of the Mosaic age and of the great prophet

and legislator himself. We are therefore fully justified in

using its records as authentic material for our investigation

in the religion of Abraham.

III. THE RELIGION OF ABRAHAM

The book of Genesis furnishesus with many details about

the faith and religious practice of Abraham. He as well as

his immediate successors worshipped God under the name

of Yhwh (Gen. I2, 8; I3, 4; 26, 25; 32, IO). But Abraham

could not have been the first who formed this divine name,

since the Genesis tradition records that already in the days

of Enosh "men began to call on the name Yhwh" (4, 26),and Noah described Yhwh as the God of Shem (9, 26). We

do not know how this name reached Abraham. It may

however be conjecturedthat the name had been known as a

divine appellation among the primitive Hebrew ancestors of

Abraham, and that Abrahamappropriatedthe name for his




new faith. The meaning of the name was revealed to Moses

in the vision of the bush, viz. The One who is, i.e., who isalways (Ex. 3, I4). It is derived from the verb nmr, n older

form of rnr. t is an imperfect form of the qal in the usual

sense of the presenttense. In the vision Godspeaking Himself

uses the form of the first person of the verb: n"ne,while men

speak of Him in the third person: Imimwhich has become

n His standing name.'

Abraham'sGod is the one and only God, the God of heaven

and earth (24, 3 7), the creatorof all the world and its creatu-

res (ch. I), who appointed the regular working of the world

and provided the nourishment of its creatures (I, I4-I5

29-30; 8, 22; 9, 3). His abode is in heaven and there reside

also His angels who act as His messengers (2I, I7; 22, II I5;

28, I2). Sometimes He descends to the earth and assumes a

formvisible to man (II, 5; i8, If.); but more often His angels

act for Him (I6, 7; 24, 7; 32, 2). Man was created by God'shands and is composed of an earthen body animated by a

spirit of life breathedinto him by his creator (2, 7) who made

him in a divine image and a divine likeness (i, 26-7; 5, I),

and appointed him ruler of the earth and its creatures (I, 28;

9, 2). Manis thus a being endowedwith a moral sense and is

punished for transgressing the divine commands (3; 4, II;

5, 5-7; I9, etc.). God is the judge of the earth, and His wayis justice and righteousness (I8, 25 I9; also I6, 5; cf. Ex.

5, 2I).

Abraham and after him Isaac worshipped God at altars

which they built in His honor (I2, 8; I3, 4; 26, 25). It is not

stated that they also offered sacrifices on the altars, but it

must be assumed that they did so, as this was the usual

1 This correct explanation of the relation of 71'71K n thedivine speech (Ex. 3, I4) to the name Yhwh was first propoundedin mysterious language by the great medieval Jewish exegete Samuelb. Meir (Rashbam) in the twelfth century; cf. Masoreth u-Biqqoreth,p. 52-53.

5




practice in their days, and as Noah had done before them

and as Jacob did after them, and as Abrahamhimself did atMoriah(8, 20; 46, I; 22, I3).1 Abraham built his altars in the

field in propinquity of trees, and he also planted a tree and

worshippedthere (I2, 6-7; I3, I8; 2I, 32). But this must not

be interpreted (as is done by modern scholars) as a belief on

Abraham's part in the sacred character of trees as being

themselves of divine origin, or as serving as a habitation for

the divine. Such a belief would be irreconcileablewith Abra-ham's faith in the God of heaven and earth. In Mesopotaniia,too, the inhabitants had long before Abraham discardedsuch

primitive notions and had learnt to house their gods in

sanctuaries and in temples. Rather must Abraham's choice

of such a site for his worshipbe explained as an adoption for

some reason or other of a custom prevalent in Canaan(Deut.

I2, 2, etc.). Similarly Jacob followed the custom of his sur-

roundings when he set up a stone at Bethel and anointed

it with oil, and vowed to make it a house of God (28, I8-22).

Jacob could not possibly have believed that his God who was

the Godof Abraham(v. I3), and the God of heaven and earth,

would dwellin the stone as the Canaanitesmighthave believed

of their local numen. His Godwas a universal Godwho would

be with him also in Harran and who would bring him back

from Harran to his paternal home.In the same way Abraham, like other founders of new

religions, adopted from his surroundings other ideas of a

spiritual import and incorporated them in a purified form

into his own new faith. Thus when Melchizedekking of Salem

who was the priest of his local deity El Elyon (the Most High

God) had greeted Abraham, on his return from his victory

over Chedorlaomer,n the name of this God "El Elyonthe

possessor (orcreator)of heaven and earth", Abrahamadopted

1 Similarly it is stated that Jacob built an altar at Bethel, and thatMoses built an altar at Rephidim (Gen. 35, 7; Ex. I7, I5-I6), butuothing is said explicitely about the sacrifices which were certainlyoffered on those altars.



RELIGION OF ISRAEL-SEGAL 5I

this noble description and soon styled his own only God

"Yhwh El Elyon possessor (or creator) of heaven and earth"(I4, I9-20 22). Similarly Abraham adopted as a description

of his God the title 'El Olam' (the everlasting God, 2I, 33).

Both the names Elyon and Olam were known in Canaan as

divine titles.' Perhaps also the divine epithet El Shaddai

(God Almighty), first found in the story of Abraham (I7, I)

and the meaning and origin of which are obscure,was origi-

nally a divine name older than Abraham which was incor-porated into Abraham'sreligion.

Furthermore Abraham also enriched his religion with

borrowings romthe sociallife of his surroundings.He adopted

social institutions of a secular character, filled them with a

new and deeply spiritual content, and converted them into

religious institutions of a lofty and sacramental character.

The institution of the covenant was known in ancient times

as an agreementbetween two parties regulatingtheir mutual

relationship and defining the rights and duties of each side.

Though the parties may have called upon the gods to punish

the breaking of the agreement, it was nevertheless a purely

social and political institution, and it has no place in the

relationof man andthe deity. In Abraham'sreligionthe cove-

nant became the foundation upon which was established the

relation of God to primeval mankind (6, I8; 9, 9-I7) and moreespecially the relation between God and the patriarchs and

their descendants the people of Israel (I5; I7, 2ff.; Ex. I9,

5; 24, etc). The conceptionof the covenant raised immensely

the moral stature of man by making him as it were a partner

in a solemn treaty with the divine. Thus man was restored

to his originalrank in the creation as a being created in the

image and likeness of the divine, and as having possession

of a large measure of moral and spiritual independence.

Another social institution of a secular origin borrowed by

Abraham's religion and transformedinto a religious rite of

1 Cf. Cassuto, Enc. Biblica (Hebrew), I, in the respective articles;

also Dussaud, Ioc. cit., p. 359-60.






2I, 4; Lev. I2, 3). From the story of Dinah at Shechemit is

clear that circumcision was strictly observed by Abraham'simmediate descendants Jacob and his sons (34, I4-I5), and

from the story of Zipporah we learn that it had to be per-

formed in infancy, in accordance with Genesis I7.

IV. THE ORIGIN OF CIRCUMCISION IN ISRAEL

Modern biblical scholars who accept the Documentary

Theory in the composition of the Hexateuch deny the his-

toricity of the ascription to Abraham of the institution of

circumcision in Israel. They assign Genesis ch. I7 to the

priestly document, which they hold was composed in the

Babylonian exile when circumcision had assumed an exag-

gerated religiousimportanceas a distinguishingmark separa-ting the Jewish exiles from their pagan neighbors. Then

was formed the tradition that the custom had been instituted

by the first patriarch as a sign of the covenant. But the otherdocumentsof the Hexateuch have preservedearlier and more

genuine tradition of the beginning of circumcisionin Israel.

The Yahwist document (J) which belongs to the eighth cen-

tury records that it was Zipporah the wife of Moses who

introduced the custom in Israel from her Midianite home

(Ex. 4, 25-6), while the Elohist document (E), which was

abouta century earlier than J, ascribed the institution of thecustom in Israel to Joshua at Gilgal who had learnt it from

the Egyptians (Jos. 5, 3 9). But if the custom came to Israel

from Egypt it is strange that the Israelites had not adopted

if long before Joshua during their prolonged stay in Egypt.

And what impelled Joshua to introduce the operation im-

mediately on their entry into Canaanand render the Israelite

males incapacitated to meet their Canaanite enemies (cf.

Gen. 34, 25), instead of deferringthe rite until after the warwith the Canaaniteswas over? The truth is that the operationwas performedat Gilgal as a preparation for the celebrationof the passoverin whichonly the circumcisedcould participate(Jos. 5, IO; Ex. I3, 48). The account of the rite in Joshua




5, 2-9 may be of a somewhat legendary character, but so

much is clear from it which may be accepted as historical,viz. that circumcisionwas an old custom in Israel which had

been neglected during the life in the wilderness, and that it

had to be renewedin view of the forthcoming celebration of

the passover. The support for the view that Israel in Egypt

was uncircumcisedderivedfrom Joshua 5, 9: "This day have

I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you", is based

on an incorrect exegesis. The 'reproachof Egypt' does not

mean that the Egyptians had reproached Israel for being

uncircumcised. 'The reproach of Egypt' is equivalent to

uncircumcision,or more exactly: to foreskin(;n*7i) whichwas

a reproach and a disgrace in Egypt both to Egyptians and

to Israelites. Thus the sons of Jacob say at Shechem: "We

cannot do this thing to give our sister to a man who has a

foreskin (;'1i5), for that is a reproachto us" (Gen. 34, I4)

viz. the foreskin is a reproach and a disgrace among us.As for the theory that according to the alleged J document

circumcision in Israel originated with Zipporah, it is quite

incredible that the institution of circumcision, or even of

infant circumcision, could ever have been associated with a

person who played such a very a minor part in the early

religion and history of Israel. The great importance attached

to the rite in early Israel is evident from Genesis 34; Jud.

I4, 3; I Sam. I4, 6, etc; cf. also Deut. IO, i6; 30, 6, and it is

most improbable that any Israelite would have traced its

originto a Midianitewoman.The fact is that the whole strange

episodewhich befell Moses on his way to Egypt was a passing

incident which left no mark whatever in biblical history or

literature.

Much ingenuity and subtle speculation have been spent

by ancient and modern expositors1 n explaining and supple-menting the, purposely, all too brief relation of the incidentin Exodus 4, 24-6. It is best explained on the supposition of

1 Babli Nedarim, f. 3I-32, and the medieval comm entaries, especiallyof Rashbam and Ibn Ezra, ad loc.




ancient Jewish Rabbis and medieval commentators that in

his eagernessto set out on his mission to Egypt Moses hadneglected or only deferred the circumcision of his second

son Eliezer11 cf. Ex. I8, 4). When at the lodging place with

his family, Moseswas suddenlyseizedwith a violent distemper

or fever which he believed threatened his life, and he saw

in it a divine punishment for the neglect of his duty to his

son. Then Zipporah performed the operation on the infant

and cast the foreskin at the feet of her husband with the

reproachfulexclamation: "Surely a bloody bridegroom (hus-band) are thou to me". When the attack on her husband

relaxed she repeated her reproach: "A bloody bridegroombecause of the circumcisions" (rni*i?, namely of her two

sons, first Gershom and new Eliezer). It is clear from Zippo-

rah's words that, contrary to what is imaginedby the critics,

Zipporah was opposed to the circumcision of her sons and

that it was forced upon her by her husband who followedthe custom of his own people .This (as we remarkedabove) is

proof of the antiquity of the law given in Genesis I7.

This incident on the road of Mosesto Egypt seems to have

had a sequel which the narrator omitted from his account.In addition to her displeasurewith the circumcisionZipporah

must also have had another cause for complaint. She could

not have been happy to be taken away with her two infantsfrom her father's home and from her native land and carried

on the long journey to the strange land of Egypt to join her

husbandin a mission in which she could have had no personal

interest. It may be assumed that the domestic peace of the

prophet was badly disturbed after the circumcision of the

infant, and he took the only reasonable course of sending his

discontented wife with the two childrenback to her father's

home. This sending back of Zipporah and her two sons isalluded to in Exodus i8, 2-3. It may be conjectured (with

Rashbam in his commentary on Ex. I8, 2) that the whole

1 Not Gershom, as interpreted by Targum 'Jonathan' and others.




story of the incident of the circumcisionwas inserted into

the account of the return of Mosesto Egypt in orderto preparethe reader for the description of the return of his family to

Moses at Sinai and of the long story of Jethro in Ex. i8.

Before leaving this subject we may refer briefly to the

preposterousreconstruction of the story of the incidnet by

Wellhausen' which is piously repeated after him by his

followers.Accordingto Welihausen Moseshimself was uncir-

cumcised, and because, contrary to the Midianite custom hehad not been circumcisedbefore his marriage to Zipporah,

he was attacked by Yhwh when on his way to Egypt andthreatened with death. To save her husband Zipporah then

circumcised their son as a substitute for her husband and

with the child's foreskintouched the genitals of her husband.

That satisfied Yhwh, and He relaxed His attack on Moses.

The act of Zipporahestablished the custom of infant circum-

cision in Israel. This subtle reconstruction bristles with

incredibilities. It is incredible that contrary to both the

Israelite and the Egyptian custom Moses grew up and was

left uncircumcised.It is incredible that Jethro the priest of

Midian would have permitted the marriage of his daughterto an uncircumcised bridegroom if the custom of Midian

demanded the performanceof the rite before the marriage.

It is incredible hat Yhwh wouldhave deferred he punishmentof the sin until Moses had become a father and until he was

on his way to Egypt on the special mission laid upon him by

Yhwh Himself. It is incredible that Yhwh the God of Israel

would have been so zealous for the custom of the Midianites

as to threaten with death His own prophet for breakingwith

it. Finally it is incredible that if the rite in Midian was con-

nected with marriage Zipporahwould have circumcised herinfant son as a substitute and not her husband himself.

V. ABRAHAM AND THE SABBATH

We have shown in a previous section that the first part

1 J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena (I899), p. 345.




of the Book of Genesisdealing with primeval times (ch. i-II)

has a distinctly Mesopotamian background, and is bestexplained as based on traditions formed from material

brought from Mesopotamiaby Abraham and recast by him

in the spirit of his monotheistic faith. This applies also to

the story of the creation of the world which opens the Book

of Genesis and the whole Torah (Gen. I-2, 3). This grand

composition stands out supreme in the cosmogonies of the

ancient world by its lofty spirit, its noble simplicity, itsserene rationality, its almost scientific graduation of the

multifarious works of creation accomplished by the divine

word. But like the story of primeval man which follows it

(2, 4-4) some at least of its leading features can be traced to a

Mesopotamiansource.The role of water as a primevalgenera-

ting element which prevails in a considerable part of the

story (vv. 2 6-7 9-I0 20-22) is a distinctly Mesopotamian

conception and quite foreign to Canaan. Tehom(rnnn)whichcarried chaotic earth on its face (v. 2) is a reminiscenceof

tiamat which designated in Mesopotamian cosmogonies the

period of chaos preceding the ordered creation. Again the

appointment of the luminaries of heaven to control time and

fix the calendar (v. I4) is paralleled by the action of Marduk n

the Babylonian epic of creation in appointing the constella-

tions of heaven and regulating the movements of the moonin relationto the sun (Enuma Elish V). The belief in a creative

Deity which underlies that epic was widely held in Mesopo-

tamia long before Abraham, and like other educated Mesopo-

tamians Abraham must have been familiar with this belief

and with the crude and fantastic myths engenderedby this

belief as exemplifiedin that epic in honor of Marduk.The

epic further relates how Marduk as king of the gods created

man out of the blood of kinguthe leader of the hosts of chaos

defeated by Marduk, and how Marduk imposed upon man

the duty of providing the food and drink of the gods in their

temples and of cultivating the lands belonging to the temples

(vi, 33-36; II5-I20). In striking contrast to this crude con-




ception of the demonic origin of man the biblical cosmogony

teaches that man was created by God in His own image and

in His own likeness and appointed ruler of the earth and its

creature (Gen. i, 26-28: cf. Psalms 8, 6-8), and instead of

man providing the food for the gods it is God who provides

the food formanand animal v. 29-30; cf. Psalms 04, 27-28;

I45, I5-I6). The conceptionof the spiritualoriginof man

and of his function in the government of the world is funda-

mental in the whole system of biblical morality and in therelationship of man to God and to his fellow creatures.

Another leading feature in the biblical cosmogony which

has its roots in Mesopotamiancivilization is the conception

of the seventh day as a divine rest day after the completion

of the work of creation. The account of how the creator

rested from all His work on the seventh day and how He

blessedand hallowedhe seventhday (2, I-3) forms hegrand

culminationof the whole story of the creationand is of course

the basis of the institution of the Sabbath in Israel (Ex. 20,

II; 3I, I7). But there can be no doubt that the Hebrew

Sabbath is somehow connected with the Accadian shappatu,

shabbatu,l but in its character and purpose the Hebrew

Sabbath is the very antithesis of the Accadian shappatu.

The shappatufell on the 7th, the I4th, the 2Ist, and on the

28th days of the lunar month (but also on the igth day ofthe lunar month which formed the completion of seven

weeks from the first appearanceof the moon on the previous

month). The shappatu was a day cursedwith ill luck so that

no enterpriseperformedon it could succeed.Whereforepeople

who could afford to postpone their work were bidden to

abstain from doing it on the shappatu, such as the king, 'the

great shepherd of the tribes' (the high priest ?). the divinerand the physician. But ordinary folk pursued their regular

employment also on the shappatu. The Hebrew Sabbath

I Cf. Cassuto, From Adam to Noah (Hebrew), p. 34-35; Commentaryon Exodus (Heb.), I69; Zimmern, KAT 3, p. 594; E. Dhorme, ManaII, Les Religions de Babylonie et d'Assyrie (I945), p. 238.




was a holy day of rest from all work for all men without

distinction of class, includingalso slaves and workinganimals(Ex. 20. io), a day blessed and sanctified by the divine creator.

The Accadian shappatu was bound up with the moon and

its month. The Hebrew Sabbath had no connection whatever

with the month. It fell always on the seventh day of the

week irrespective of the day of the month. Our records fail

to enlighten us on the origin of the Accadian shappatu. But

it may reasonably be surmised that it originated from some

superstition connectedwith a mythological explanation of the

changing phases of the moon observed on the successive

seventh day of the lunar month. The shappatu was thus

associated with the worshipof the moon and must have been

specially observed at Ur and at Harran, the Mesopotaniian

homes of Abraham which were the centres of the moon

worship. Abrahamwas thus familiar with this Mesopotaniian

institution which may have been honored in his familywho (as we have seen above) were devoted worshippers of

the moon god. But to Abraham the shappatu must have been

as hateful as the whole pagan worship of the moon. He must

have rejected its practice together with the idolatrous ideas

underlying it. Nevertheless it may be conjectured that he

did not reject it altogether. As with the ancient practice of

the circumcision, the inspired religious genius of Abrahammay have borrowed rom the shappatu he potentially valuable

idea of abstention from work on the seventh day. He then

severed the seventh day from its connection with the moon

and with the lunar month, transmuted its character and its

purpose, and converted it from an ill-omened day into a

blest and hallowedday on which the divine creator had rested

after the completion of the works of the creation. It may

furtherbe assumedthat the idea of the seventh day as a restday of the divine creator led to the conception of a creation

lasting six days. For if the creator rested on the seventh day

He must have been occupied with the work of creation duringthe precedingsix days.



6o THE JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW

We may therefore conclude with a certain measure of

probability that the tradition (at least in its pre-literaryform) underlyingthe account of the divine rest day in Gen. 2,

I-3, and with it the whole story of the creation of the world

in six days in Genesischapter i, of which the account of the

rest day forms an integral and inseparable part, belong to

the patriarchalage, and more explicitely to Abrahamhimself,

the their of Mesopotamiancivilization and the great founder

of monotheism in Israel. That the account of the divinerest day is based on a pre-Israelitetradition is also shown by

the complete absense in it of any allusion to the Israelite

Sabbath. And though the account uses the verb sbt twice,

it carefully avoids the use of the noun sabbat, no doubt

because of the close association of the noun sabbat with the

contemporary pagan institution shabbatu shappatu. Only

in the age of Moses when the pagan shabbatu shappatu

could have been no more than a faint and distant memory

to the few, Israel began to use freely its Hebrew equivalent

shabbat. For, as we shall see later, the sabbath was known

in Israel already before the Sinaitic revelation.

Before we conclude this section we may refer to an impor-

tant consequencewhich followed the severance of the seventh

day from the lunar month and its consecration as a day of

rest. This is the formation of a new unit of time, the week.Hence the use in Israel of the name sabbath as equivalent

to week (Lev. 23, I5, and often in Mishnaic Hebrew).

The division of the days into weeks independent of the

days of the month is a purely Israelite institution and

was quite unknown in ancient Mesopotamia or Egypt or

Canaan or anywhere else in the ancient world.' It was the

Jewish sabbath which introduced the week to the gentiles.

I This is admitted by such an extreme critic as S. Mowinkle, LeDecalogue (I925), p. 8i 83. Mowinkle maintains that Israel adoptedthe Sabbath from the Canaanites, but there is not a shred of evidencethat the Sabbath was known in Canaan before the coming of theIsraelites.



RELIGION OF ISRAEL-SEGAL 6I

VI. THE MESOPOTAMIANS WITH THE PATRIARCHS

The Torah relates that Abrahamemigrated from Harran,

the new home of his family, by a special divine commandto

go to the land appointed for him where a glorious future

was destinedfor him (Gen. I2, I-4). Life at Harran,the other

centre of the moon worship after Ur, could not have been

more congenial to Abraham than at Ur. Yet he must have

spent a good few years at Harran since he had acquiredthereconsiderablewealth in cattle and in slaves (I2, 5). Later we

read that for his pursuit of Chedorlaomer e armedhis retain-

ers to the number of 3I8 (I4,I4). These were evidently his

slaves "born in his own house." But they could not have

been born to him in Canaan,since the Chedorlaomer pisode

occurredless than ten years after his arrival in Canaan. The

episode preceded the covenant described in Genesis I5 which

contains an allusion to the attack on Chedorlaomerand

Abraham's fear of the revenge of the enemy: "Fear not

Abraham, I am thy shield" (I5, i). But the covenant no

doubt took place before the birth of Ishmael which occurred

eleven years after Abrahams'settlement in Canaan (i6, i6;I2, 4). The 3I8 retainers must have come with Abraham

from Harran in their youth. They were Mesopotamiansborn

and bredin the Mesopotamianculture. Like Abraham(I4, I3)

they may have been of Hebrew descent. But what was their

religious faith ? It is hard to believe that they had shaken

off completely the Mesopotamian culture with its pagan

beliefs and habits. Abraham could not have forced them todo it. His religion was not of a missionary character. Thereis no biblical support whatever for the old Jewish legends

that Abraham tried to spread his faith among the heathen.His religion, like the religion of Israel in biblical times, was

the exclusive possession of himself and his own intimates.His wife Sarah seems to have shared his faith. She calls uponYhwh to judge between her and her husband (i6, 5), andshe is ranked by the divine promise as an equal to Abraham




(I7, I5-I6). His concubine Hagar also is treated as a believer

in God by the appearance o her of an angel (i6, 7-I3; 2I, I7).

So also his old servant appears as a devoted believer in the

God of his master (24, I2 2I 27). But of Abraham's offspring

only Isaac inherited his true faith. Ishmael and the sons of

Keturahintermingled with their neighborsand adopted their

faith. So also his nephew Lot who had accompaniedhim to

Canaan left him and settled in heathen Sodom and became

the father of Moab and Ammon who practised idolatry. Itis true that Abraham imposed circumcision on all male

dependants as also on Ishmael (I7, 23 27), but the religious

significance of circumcision as a sign of initiation into the

covenant was confined exclusively to Abraham and his

consecrated offspring (I7, 9-II). It may of course be

granted that Abraham did not permit his dependants to

practise idolatry in his household. But on the other hand itis hard to believe that those hundreds of native Mesopota-

minans in Abraham'sentourage had become converted to his

pure faith and had completely abandonedthe old inveterate

beliefs and ideas and practices which they had inheritedfrom

their heathen ancestorsin their old home. The heathen strains

in their Mesopotamiannaturemust have continuedto operate

more or less strongly in this big group of aliens in Canaan

during the life of Abraham and also afterwards when theypassed into the tutelage of his son Isaac.

Rebekah the Mesopotamianwife of Isaacmust have adopted

the faith of her husband. It is related that when she was in

trouble she went to seek an oracle from Yhwh (25, 22-23).

Their son Esau himself married Canaanitishwives and settled

among the heathen inhabitants of Mount Seir where he no

doubt adopted their faith (ch. 36). Only Jacob remainedtrueto the paternal faith and preserved it also during his long

sojournat Harran (28, I2-22; 3I, 3ff.; 32, IO). His Mesopota-

niian wives Leah and Rachel are also described as believers

in God (29, 32-35; 30, 24; 3I, i6). But theirfaith seems to have

been somewhat tainted by a remanat of heathenism. Leah






his home in Canaan as 'the land of Hivites'. These Mesopo-

tamians in Canaan kept alive in the patriarchal familiesremnants of the old Mesopotamiancivilization, but gradually

absorbed the faith of the patriarchs and became integrated

into the people of Israel. Some of them, if not all, must have

gone down to Egypt with the sons of Jacob and come up from

Egypt under the leadership of Moses as full Israelites or as

members of the mixed multitude which joined the Israelite

exodus (Ex.I2,

38). But it may be assumedwith confidencethat their Mesopotamian nfluence continued to operatemore

or less actively on the nascent young nation of Israelin Egypt

and also after the Exodus.

VII. ISRAEL IN EGYPT

The children of Jacob entered Egypt as a group of related

families and went out of Egypt as a people with a distinctindividuality. The long sojourn in the land of the Nile failed

to submerge then in the great civilization surrounding them

or to stifle their native genius. Even when they had spread

beyond the narrow confines of Goshen and had penetrated

into Egypt proper, andhad also been forced into the Egyptian

economy as laborersin buildingand in the field (Ex. I, 7 14),

they preserved their Hebrew identity and particularism.Indeed the peculiar structure of Egyptian society with its

rigiddivision into fixed classes madeit impossibleforstrangers

to penetrate into its ranks, more particularly for Hebrew

strangers whose intimacy was shunnedby the Egyptians and

whose native calling as shepherds was despised (Gen. 43,

32; 46, 34). Whereasin a later stage of their history Israelites

freely adoptedBabylonian and Persian names even of a pagan

theophoricformation, in Egypt we find among the Israelites

only one or two isolated names of Egyptian origin, namely

Phinehas, the name of a priest, and Hophni of a later genera-

tion, also a priest (I Sam. I, 3). The Egyptian name Moses

of the great prophet was given him by his Egyptian foster




mother (Ex. 2, io). Of intermarriage between an Egyptian

and an Israelite only one case is recorded (Lev. I4, IO-II).The influence of Egyptian civilization on the Hebrew

immigrantswas slight and, if at all, confinedto the handicrafts.

It may be assumedthat the builders of the Tabernaclein the

wilderness had acquired their skill from the Egyptians. The

Israelites may have also learnt something of Egyptian agricul-

ture when they were employed by the Egyptians in the

labors of the field (Ex. I, 14), and they carriedthis learning

with them into Canaan. In the realm of ideas the Egyptian

civilization exercised no influence whatever upon Israel.

There is no trace in the Pentateuch of any resemblance or

parallel to Egyptian thought. At most Egyptian influence

was of a negative character. Israel is exhorted not to follow

the example of Egypt or Canaan in the matter of incestuous

connexions (Lev. i8, 2). Perhaps also the complete silence

maintained in the Pentateuch respectingthe life after death,which cannot be only accidental, may have its cause in the

opposition of the Hebrewlawgiver to the extraorinaryimpor-

tance attached to it in the Egyptian religionand in Egyptian

thought and practice. Members of the virile young Hebrew

nation (compare he instructive contrast between the Egyptian

women and the Hebrew women in Exodus I, I9) must have

found the absorption of the Egyptians in the business ofdeath and the tomb strange and incomprehensible. The

Egyptian religion with its devotion to the worship of beasts

and reptiles and with its deification of the Pharaohs must

have arousedin the breast of the Israelitefeelings of profound

repugnance and contempt. No wonder therefore that the

Egyptian religion and the whole Egyptian civilization which

centered in the religion remained strange and alien to the

Israelites in spite of their long sojournin the midst of them.'Hence when Joshua proposed to Israel in Shechem to choose

for themselves a religion other than the ancestral religion he

1 Ezekiel's accusation against Israel of worshipping Egyptian idols(Ez. 20, 8; 237) is a generalization of the acts of individuals.

6




naxned for their choice the religion of their distant forbears

in Mesopotamia and the religion of the Amorites whoseland they had occupied (Jos. 24, i6), but he did not mention

the religion of Egypt where they had dwelt so many genera-

tions. It was inconceivable that they could ever choose a

religion so utterly repugnant as the religion of Egypt.

Thus Israel formed in Egypt a closed Hebrew community

in the midst of the large Egyptian world around it, but it

remained quite impervious to any real influence from thatworld. It continued to cultivate as best it could the faith

it had inherited from the patriarchs with its few symbols,

such as cicumcision and occasional worship by sacrifices.

But it also held fast to some remnants of the Mesopotamian

civilization, such as the social and legal customs observed

also by the patriarchs, and some notions and practices of a

religious nature imported by the Mesopotamiandependants

of the patriarchs which were inconsistent with the faith of

Abraham.' These two opposing elements tended in practical

life to coalesce into a sort of syncretism which tarnished the

purity of the ancestral faith. The mission of Moses and the

great events of the exodus and the covenant suppressed, at

least outwardly, the Mesopotamianelement in the people's

life, or convertedit into rawmaterialfor the ethical legislation

of the Mosaic code. An instructive illustration of the use ofMesopotamianmaterial in the Mosaiccode is affordedby the

striking affinity, both in their literary form and in their

contents, of many civil laws in the Pentateuch (notably in

Exodus 2I-22) with the code of Hamurabiand other ancient

codes belonging to the sphere of Mesopotamiancivilization.

In the Pentateuch the Mesopotamian material has been

remoulded and revitalized by the high ethical spirit of theSinaitic revelation.

1 The pratice of Mesopotamian heathenism by Israel in Egypt isproved by the words of Joshua: "Put away the gods which yourfathers served on the other side of the river and in Egypt" (Josh. 24,

I4).






that land. The cultivation and the oral preservation of those

noble traditions, probably chiefly among the elders of the

peopleor in the tribeof Levi who seems to have been specially

devoted to the ancestral faith (Ex. 32, 26), are proof of a

high degree of intelligence and of a refined taste. Much of

the exquisite beauty of the Genesis narratives must have been

inherent in the oral traditions. For, in the course of their

being handed down from generation to generation these

traditions must have assumed more or less a fixed form, sothat it is likely that much of their oral and traditional pattern

has been reproduced n our Book of Genesis. This is especially

true of the snatches of ancient poetry scattered in the book

(Gen. 4, 23-24; 9, 26-27; 24, 40; 25, 23; 27, 28-29 39-40; ch.

49 in its original form) which display high poetic artistry.

It is also true of many of the prose narratives in Genesis

which contain perceptible differences in style and diction.

These differences must have existed already in the oral

traditions, and may safely be attributed to the different

persons who first formulated the various traditions, and not

at all to different written documents of later ages, as main-

tained by the literary critics.

The traditions of Genesis thus present a mirror in which

are reflected in some measure the character and the genius

of the people who created and preserved these traditions.The picture reflected is very far removed from the conven-

tional picture of the Israelites of the exodus as a horde of

uncouth and semi-barbarousbedouins which is depicted by

modern critics and historians.

Documents

The Religion of Israel Before Sinai