« PreviousContinue »
had relapsed, is such a Glory of the Judaical Laws abově all other, as can never be eclipsed by all that can be said against them by Infidel Tongues. Talk what you will of your Solon's, Lycurgus's and Numa's; but the idolatrous Worships which they established by their Laws, is enough to ruin their Character in the Opinion of all fober Deilts; whilst they must needs have a secret Esteem for thie Jewish Legislator, in setting the Worship of the one true God among his People alone, in opposition to the whole idolatrous World." Nay, that hostile odium, which the Historian calls their Aversion to a free Conversation with other Nations which their Law obliged them to, was that which preserved both their Religion and their Laws from the encroaching Powers of their neighbouring Potentates: For if they had wanted this, they
had been lost in their Babylonian Captivity, and for ever mixed with that idolatrous Nation. And truly this Surliness was such a good Piece of Policy among the Jews, that we English-mes, in the midst of our Complaisance, should not do amifs to learn, who have so long been fond of fetching over the Customs of a neighbouring Nation, that they feeing us so very obliging; were once in a fáir Way to have senit
us over their Government and Religion too. Objections As to your Exceptions which you have raised againft
fome particular Instances in the Mosaical Law, I think
they are not very material. The Forbidding of the Blood Laws ana fwered. of Animals for Food was a Noachical Precept, as well as
Mofaical; which God by a new Sanction thought fit under Moses's Dispensation to continue. And at the first giving of it in Noah's Time, it was a very proper Injunction, and highly rational : For God at the fame Time gave Mankind a License to eat the Flesh of Animals, excepting only the Blood. This being as it were a Kind of Sacrament or Token, to put them in Mind of the Tenderness they ought to have in shedding human Blood; as appears by the Context, where Murder is forbidden, and Blood is required for Blood. As to your Objection 2gainst the Law of sowing mixed Seed, I presume the ReaJon which Philo gives is sufficient, chat the Strength of
the Ground might not be worn out thereby, and no Encouragement given to the Husbandman's' Coverousness. The wearing Linsey-woolsey was probably a proud fantastick Fashion of the Heathens at that Time, which therefore the Jews were forbid to imitate. Though further, I believe all the three Conjunctions mentioned, Deut. xxii. of yoking the Ox with an Ass, the mingling of Seeds, and wearing. Linen mixed with Woollen have, as Theodoret observes, something Emblematical mixed with the Precept, to make Men have the greater Abhorrence of all venereal Commixtures contrary to Nature. As for the Lex Talionis of the Fews, let it have been as rigid as you would make it, it is no more than what was pra&tised in other Nations, and had a Place among the celebrated Roman Laws in the twelve Tables. And as it is fer down in Aulus Gellius, is thus; SI MEMBRVM. RUPERIT. NI. CUM EO. PACIT. TALIO. ESTO. But the Jews say that for Mutilations where Death did not ensue, a pecuniary Mult was generally accepted and granted to the maimed Person; and that the Judge did never infli& the Talio, but upon the Desire of the injured Party, who, unless he were very malicious, would rather accept a Recompence in Money. And so for the Return of mortgaged Estates to the Owners at the Jubilee, there is no Manner of Injustice in this Law, because the Estate could be fold for no more Money than an Annuity, from the Time of Sale till the Year of Jubilee, was worth, and it was at the Purchaser's Peril if he ventured more upon it. And there was Encouragement enough for Men of Parts and Industry to raise themselves by Purchase only of Annuities for fifty Years : Nay farther, this Law seems to be excellently contrived to hinder the encroaching Purchases of covętous Men, which have given so much Disturbance in all Common-wealths; and which occasioned the Leges Agraria which
such great Content to the Roman + Citizens. So Aristotle in his Politicks saysl, that Solon
* Noct, Attic. Lib. 20. cap. 1. + Liv. Hist. Lib. 4. cap. 48. Lib. 6. cap. 11. 14.
| Arift. Pol
. Lib. 2. cap. 7. U
made a Lav, and that other Countries have the same, that every Man fould not purchase as much Estate as he had a Mind to. And again*, The Lav forbids to fell a Man's Housisold-goods; as the Lay of the Locri, which obliges * Man not to sell them, unless he can make it out that some great Calamity has befallen him. Besides, the Lav command to keep those ancient Patrimonies which came by Inheritance. And fo again in another place. In many Cities it is established by Lav, that no one Mould have Posver to alienate the ancient Inheritances. And there is a Law which is said to be of Oxylus, which injoins that no one should lend Money to arother, and take his Eftate as a Pavn for it. So that if this be a Fault in the Mofaical Laws, the Attick and Roman are liable to the fame Censure. As for the red Heifer which is commanded to be sacrificed, Numb. xix, 2. the Reason most probably is, that such an one is more beautiful and choice, such as the Ancients made use of for Sacrifice ; of which † Plutarch says the Ægyptians were so scrupulous, that if a red Bull had but one black or white Hair, he was unfit for Sacrifice. And lastly, for the Scape-Goat, I take that to be an expiatory Sacrifice, purposely designed to be a Type of our blessed Savić our, and was expiatory only by Relation to his Sufferings.
Phil. For my Part I have no great liking to your Types and Figures; but why should not these Laws be given in Opposition to the Zabii
, those ancient Idolaters, which learned Men of late have found out; and from whose Do&rines methinks they give a pretty handsome Rationale of the Mofaick Laws? Cred. Let this
Rationale be as pretty as you please, I believe it is very false, and that there were never any more such a Nation as the Zabii, than the Utopians. They never had any more Being than in the Dreams of the fallifying Fows, who four or five hundred Years ago wrote fome Sham-Books, under their Name. I do not doubt but that Maimonides saw them, and was imposed upon by,
* Id. Lib. 6. cap. 4.
+ Plut. de Ilid. & Ofyr.
them, so that the. Cheat does not lie at his Door. The Zabii *, among the ancient Arabians, were esteemed a Name for Sorcerers or Fortune-tellers, and signified no more than the Chaldai † in Latin, and the Gypsies in English. And thus 'tis used in the Alcoran || : and AbulPharajins, set out by Dr. Pocock, says, their Profession was the same with that of the ancient Chaldeans. Now should not we make pretty Work of it, if we should go to give an Account of the old Ægyptian Rites and Customs, and the Coprick Language, from the Lies and Cart of our vagrant Gypsies? And truly the Case is the very fame of those Books which Maimonides relies upon, that pretend to give an Account of the old Chaldean Idolaters in Abraham's and Moses's Time, and to be wrote as long ago as that. Now if these Zabian Books t, which Maimonides and his Followers so much rely upon, prove to be Forgeries, then all this Zabian Hypothesis falls to the Ground. Now these Zabian Books which Maimonides faw, were one called Haiftamchus, another Hattel-efbmaoth, or of Speaking Images ; another called Tamtam, another named Hafscharubh, another of the Degrees of the celestial Orbs, and of the ascendant Figures in each Degree, another Book of speaking Images, a certain Book attributed to Hermes, a Book wrote by Isaac the Zabian, which disputes for the Law of the Zabians, and his great Book of the Customs and Particularities of the Zabians : Besides another Book of Agriculture. Now is not this a pretty Library of Books, for the Abrahamical and Mofaical Times? But if they are fo ancient as is pretended, how came they never to be heard of, but among the Jews in Ægypt, or Spain, about four or five hundred Years ago? One would have thought, that some of the Writers of the Old, or New Testament, should have spoke of some of them, or some of the learned Fathers, who understood the Orientals, as St. Jerom and Origen, who were so inquisitive this Way, methinks they should have somewhere mentioned them. But, to go no
* Aul. Gellius, Lib. 4. cap. 1. † Az. 2. || Hift. Dyn. p. 281. # Vid. Maimon. More Nevoch. Part IIle cap. 29.
farther, farther, some of these Books carry Forgery in their very Titles
. The Book of speaking Images looks like the sto ries of the Talisman's which the Arabian talks so much of about that Time. The Book of celestial Orbs and Afcendants looks like a Forgery about Rambam's Time, when the Follies of Judicial Astrology among the Arabians were at the Height. But Ifaac the Zabian was infatuated to give himself that Name, pretending to be older than A braham, and
take his Son's Name. Or however, his Jewish Name must needs tell all the World, he was no Zabian. And besides Isaac, in his great Book, treats of the Temples dedicated by the Zabii to Intellectual Forms; whence any Body would know the Book to be wrote by some one, who had been bred in a School of the Peripatetick Philosophy. And the Disputes in those Books about the Eternity of the World Thew, they were compiled by some one, who had been where Aristotle's Arguments upon that Subject had been bandied about. I should weary you, to tell you all the simple Tales which Maimonides quotes out of these Books; which are all composed in the very Strain of the Talmud; from whence any Body may guess their Original. They make Abra bam very doughtily disputing with a great King of the Zabians, That there is another God belides the Sun, and that the Sun is but the Hatchet in the Hand of God, For which the King claps Abraham up into Prison ; but notwithstanding that, Abraham disputes there still; so that the King at last fearing, left Abraham should do Milchief among his People by his subtile Disputations, seizes all his Goods, and banishes him to the farther Part of the Eaft. Now does this look like a Zabian, or rather not like a Jew, who had a Mind to aggrandize the great Parts of his Progenitor? Besides, the Foolishness of that Writer is betrayed, by making such great Monarchies in thofe Ages of the World, when Kingdoms were generally confined to Cities, or small Provinces, as appears by Abraham's fighting half a Score of such Kings with 318 Men. The same Books tell you strange Tales of Adam, and Seth, and Noah, &c. which plainly Mew them to be wrote by