that knowledge was the sum total, the sole object of his education. This was the life of

his soul--the better, and only true life, to which all else as well as the life of the body

were merely subservient, as means towards an end. His religion consisted of two things:

knowledge of God, which by a series of inferences, one from the other, ultimately

resolved itself into theology, as they understood it; and service, which again consisted

of the proper observance of all that was prescribed by God, and of works of charity

towards men--the latter, indeed, going beyond the bound of what was strictly due (the

Chovoth) into special merit or "righteousness" (Zedakah). But as service presupposed

knowledge, theology was again at the foundation of all, and also the crown of all, which

conferred the greatest merit. This is expressed or implied in almost innumerable

passages of Jewish writings. Let one suffice, not only because it sounds more

rationalistic, but because it is to this day repeated each morning in his prayers by every

Jew: "These are the things of which a man eats the fruit in this world, but their

possession continueth for the next world: to honour father and mother, pious works,

peacemaking between man and man, and the study of the law, which is equivalent to

them all" (Peah. i. 1).

And literally "equivalent to them all" was such study to the Jew. The circumstances of

the times forced him to learn Greek, perhaps also Latin, so much as was necessary for

intercourse; and to tolerate at least the Greek transla tion of the Scriptures, and the use

of any language in the daily prayers of the Shema, of the eighteen benedictions, and of

the grace after meat (these are the oldest elements of the Jewish liturgy). But the

blessing of the priests might not be spoken, nor the phylacteries nor the Mesusah

written, in other than the Hebrew language (Megil. i. 8; Sotah, vii. 1, 2); while heathen

science and literature were absolutely prohibited. To this, and not to the mere learning

of Greek, which must have been almost neces sary for daily life, refer such prohibitions

as that traced to the time of Titus (Sotah, ix. 14), forbidding a man to teach his son Greek.

The Talmud itself (Men. 99 b) furnishes a clever illustration of this, when, in reply to the

question of a younger Rabbi, whether, since he knew the whole "Thorah" (the law), he

might be allowed to study "Greek wisdom," his uncle reminded him of the words (Josh

1:8), "Thou shalt meditate therein day and night." "Go, then, and consider," said the

older Rabbi, "which is the hour that is neither of the day nor of the night, and in it thou

mayest study Grecian wisdom." This, then, was one source of danger averted. Then, as

for the occupations of ordinary life, it was indeed quite true that every Jew was bound

to learn some trade or business. But this was not to divert him from study; quite the

contrary. It was regarded as a profanation--or at least declared such--to make use of

one's learning for secular purposes, whether of gain or of honour. The great Hillel had it

(Ab. i. 13): "He who serves himself by the crown (the 'Thorah') shall fade away." To this

Rabbi Zadok added the warning, "Make study neither a crown by which to shine, nor

yet a spade with which to dig"--the Mishnah inferring that such attempts would only

lead to the shortening of life (Ab. iv. 5). All was to be merely subsidiary to the one grand

object; the one was of time, the other of eternity; the one of the body, the other of the

soul; and its use was only to sustain the body, so as to give free scope to the soul on

its upward path. Every science also merged in theology. Some were not so much

sciences as means of livelihood, such as medicine and surgery; others were merely

handmaidens to theology. Jurisprudence was in reality a kind of canon law; mathematics

and astronomy were subservient to the computations of the Jewish calendar; literature

existed not outside theological pursuits; and as for history, geography, or natural

studies, although we mark, in reference to the latter, a keenness of observation which

often led instinctively to truth, we meet with so much ignorance, and with so many

gross mistakes and fables, as almost to shake the belief of the student in the

trustworthiness of any Rabbinical testimony.

From what has been stated, three inferences will be gathered, all of most material bearing

on the study of the New Testament. It will be seen how a mere knowledge of the law

came to hold such place of almost exclusive importance that its successful prosecution

seemed to be well-nigh all in all. Again, it is easy now to understand why students and

teachers of theology enjoyed such exceptional honour (Matt 23:6,7: Mark 12:38,39: Luke