Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia or Theological Encyclopedic Dictionary. Volume XI

Contents Publisher's Preface What are Laban's idols, and for what purpose did Rachel steal them from her father? § 1. Hypotheses about the etymology of the word teraphim § 2. Summary of the previous one and a general conclusion about the etymology of the word תְּרָפִים § 3. Translations of the word into other languages § 4. Places from the Bible where the word תְּרָפִים is found § 5. Analysis of the given passages of the Bible (see. § 4) § 6. Opinions of Talmudists about the teraphim and the state of the cult of the teraphim in the extra-biblical period § 7. News of ancient writers about slandering heads and about some types of bloody cults § 8. A general view of the evolution of the teraphim § 9. Some opinions about the teraphim § 10. Conclusion: The history of idols according to the Book of Wisdom This publication brings to the attention of the reader a previously unpublished work by St. Pavel Florensky. Manuscript 1 is dated November (on the cover) – December (on the title page) 1904. According to the signature on the title page, Fr. Pavel wrote this work while a 1st year student at the Moscow Theological Academy. The work has two titles: on the cover - “About teraphim” and on the title page - “What are Laban’s idols, and for what purpose did Rachel steal them from her father?” The second title is then repeated twice more: before the bibliography and before the main text - apparently, it is the “official” formulation of the topic of this student essay. The title page, in addition to the title of the work, the author's surname, location and year, contains the reviewer's review (underlining the author of the review): I am truly in awe of the author’s outstanding talents and amazingly meticulous work ethic! The highest academic score is not enough to indicate the true dignity of this work over others. It is with shame that I give it a pitiful 5, which looks so because of the immeasurable superiority of this titanic work compared to my assessment. The author of the review is Archimandrite Joseph (Petrovykh), the future Metropolitan of Petrograd, the founder of the “Josephite” schism, who was an extraordinary professor and inspector of the MDA in 1904. He also owns a few non-author comments in the margins of the work 2. As follows from the first title, the essay is devoted to teraphim - objects, references to which in the text of the Old Testament to this day do not have a generally accepted interpretation, which does not allow us to draw unambiguous conclusions about either their appearance or their purpose. Addressing this topic, the author of the work sets out and critically evaluates various views on the etymology of the word “teraphim” (§§ 1–2), discusses the ways in which this word is rendered in ancient translations of the Old Testament into Greek and in the Aramaic Targums (§ 3), cites all references to teraphim in the Old Testament (§ 4) and analyzes them in detail (§ 5). Then, drawing on rabbinic tradition and the evidence of medieval Arab sources, the author connects the biblical teraphim with the cult of the Sabians, who, according to sources, practiced human sacrifice (§§ 6–7). As a conclusion, a theory is proposed for the gradual transformation of the ancient custom of venerating teraphim, which, according to the author, were originally only talismans reminiscent of deceased ancestors, into the savage magical practice of fortune telling using a human head, used by the Sabians (§ 8). In conclusion, the author analyzes the opinions of some European researchers who wrote about teraphim and Sabians (§ 9), and cites as support for his theory the evidence of the Book of Wisdom of Solomon (Wis. 13:11–19; 14:13–16) about idols and idolatry (§ 10). The published text is valuable primarily as a historical document: written by Florensky in the first six months of his studies at the MDA, this work is one of the first literary experiments of this remarkable thinker in the field of research of religious ideas and evidence of one of the important episodes of his intellectual and spiritual life. As such, we hope this publication will be of interest to specialists in the history of Russian religious philosophy and especially to experts and researchers of the life and creative heritage of Fr. Pavel Florensky. At the same time, it is important to note that, although this work undoubtedly contains a number of important things for understanding the later work of Fr. Paul's ideas, as a study in the field of biblical studies or the history of the ancient East, it is unlikely to have independent significance. Being an essay by a 1st year student, it necessarily has a compilative nature: a significant part of the text is a presentation of the works of other authors, and often direct quotation of fairly extensive fragments from them. It is obvious that the scientific field to which the topic of the essay relates was, at least at the time of its writing, not well known to P. Florensky, and the essay itself was written in a hurry, as evidenced by a large number of various types of inaccuracies and errors 3 . Although the list of references given at the beginning of the essay consists in general of works that were relevant at that time, the essay itself is replete with references to literature inaccessible to the author, which he borrowed from secondary sources, as a result of which points of view (in particular, on the etymology of the word “teraphim”) expressed in completely different eras and at different levels of development of science 4, as well as opinions that were already in the beginning. XX century were hardly taken seriously by specialists 5 . In connection with the indicated features of Florensky’s work, the enthusiastic review of it by Archimandrite attracts attention. Joseph 6. Of course, we must not forget that we are talking about a student’s essay, and not about the work of a mature scientist. As such, it obviously differed favorably from the work of other students in the volume and variety of literature used, and the inspired enthusiasm. But at the same time, the description of this work as “amazingly painstaking” looks like a clear exaggeration, given the number and nature of the errors made in it. In preparation for publication, the author's text was brought into line with modern standards of spelling and punctuation, with the exception of extensive quotations in French and German, which were verified with the original, but were not translated into modern spelling; spelling errors - both in Russian words and in quotations in modern European languages ​​- are corrected, and author's abbreviations in the text and in the bibliography are disclosed without special reservations. Bibliographic descriptions were, as far as possible, verified, supplemented and brought into compliance with today's accepted standards. All words and quotes in ancient and modern foreign languages, given by the author as a rule without translation, were provided with a Russian translation in the notes. Errors in the spelling of words and expressions in ancient languages ​​in the main text have been corrected, while the author's spellings are given in the notes. References to sources cited in the text have been left unchanged and, where possible, provided with explanatory notes. In addition, the notes provide brief background information on all researchers, writers, and sources mentioned in the main text, excluding common names. Obvious omissions in the author's text and in the author's notes have been restored where possible by the publisher and are marked with angle brackets – . The resulting mass of notes—including the author's subpage notes and explanations made in the margins of the manuscript by both the author and the reviewer—is structured as follows. Below the text are: 1) author's notes; 2) glosses placed in the manuscript in the margins or between the lines; 3) translations of foreign words, expressions and quotes made by the publisher. In this case, the author's notes have continuous numbering and are marked in the text with a footnote in the form of a number (Arabic numerals) with a bracket - 1), 2), etc., glosses in the text are marked with asterisks - *, **, etc. (page numbering), translations - in Roman numerals - i, ii, etc. (page numbering). The publisher's notes are placed behind the text and marked with signs in the form of a number (Arabic numerals, continuous numbering), typed in bold and italic font. The manuscript is kept in the archives of P. A. Florensky (Museum of Priest Pavel Florensky, Moscow) and provided for publication by the director of the Museum, Abbot Andronik (Trubachev). What are Laban’s idols, and for what purpose did Rachel steal them from her father? P. Florensky, 1st year student at the Moscow Theological Academy. “...and there will be judgment on the idols of the pagans, since among God’s creation they have become an abomination, a stumbling block for the souls of men and a snare for the feet of the foolish” (Wis. 14:11). Syn. lane – The Bible, or the books of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments / In Russian translation with parallel passages. St. Petersburg, 1900 5. M.T. – Hebrew Bible, Masoretic text. Mandelstam. Torah. – Torah, i.e. law, or the Pentateuch of Moses: In favor of Russian Jews / Literal translation by L. I. Mandelstam, candidate of St. Petersburg University. Berlin, 5622 (1862). 5632 (1872 2). Reuss. La Bible. – La Bible / Traduction nouvelle avec introductions et commentaires par Edouard Reuss. Ancient Testament. Part. 2 Les Prophètes. P., 1876. T. 1. Buxtorf. Lexicon. – Lexicon chaldaicum, talmudicum et rabbinicum / Nunc primum in lucem editum a Johanne Buxtorfio F. linguae hebr. professore cum privilegio. Basileae, 1639. Chwolsohn. Ssabier. – Chwolsohn D. Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus. St. Petersburg, 1856. 2 Bde. [- The first volume contains the actual presentation, and the second contains the texts that served as primary sources, with their translations into German]. Creuzer. Symbolik. – Creuzer G. F. Symbolik und Mythologie der Alten Völker, besonders der Griechen. Lpz.; Darmstadt, 1820 2. Bd. 2. Ewald. Alterthümer. – Ewald H. Die Alterthümer des Volkes Israel. Göttingen, 1844. 1866 3. S. 295–300. Ferriere. Paganisme. – Ferrière E. Paganisme des Hébreux jusquʼà la captivité de Babylone. P., 1884. Gesenius. Thesaurus. – Gesenii Gvilielmi Thesaurus philologicus criticus linguae hebraeae et chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti. Lipsiae, 1842. T. 3. Hamburger. Realencyklopädie. – Hamburger J. Realencyklopädie für Bibel und Talmud. Abt. 1: Die biblischen Artikel. Breslau, 1870. [- S. 486 (Teraphim), 685 (Laban), e. a.] Jahn. Archäologie. – Jahn J. Biblische Archäologie. Wien, 1805. Th. 3: Heilige Alterthümer. S. 9, 44–45, 135, 504–508. [- the copy of page 9 in the library is missing, why it was not used]. Jurieu. Histoire. – Jurieu P. Histoire critique des dogmes et des cultes, bons & mauvais, qui ont été dans l'eglise depuis Adam jusqu'à Jesus-Christ, où l'on trouve l'origine de toutes les Idolatries de l'ancien Paganisme, expliquées par rapport a celles des juifs. Amsterdam, 1704, pp. 448–476. Riehm. Handwörterbuch. – Handwörterbuch des biblischen Altertums für gebildete Bibelleser / Hrsg. v. E. Riehm. Bielefeld; Lpz., 1884. Bd. 2. S. 1450–1453 (Schrader E. Schekel), 1647–1648 (Kleinert P. Theraphim), 1648–1649 (Terebinthe). Roscher. Lexicon. – Ausführliches Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie / Hrsg. W. H. Roscher. Lpz., 1884–1890. Bd. 1. Abt. 1–2; 1890–1897. Bd. 2. Abt. 1–2; 1897–1902. Bd. 3. Abt. 1 [and other separate issues Bd. III/2. Lpz., 1909]. RThK. – Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche / In 2nd Aufl., begonnen v. J. J. Herzog und G. L. Plitt, fortgeführt v. Alb. Hauck. Lpz., 1885. Bd. 15. S. 550–551 (Rüetschi. Teraphim). Schenkel. Bibellexikon. – Bibellexikon: Realwörterbuch zum Handgebrauch für Geistliche und Gemeindeglieder / Hrsg. v. D. Schenkel. Lpz., 1875. Bd. 5. S. 499 (Merx A. Theraphim). Scholz. Götzendienst. – Scholz P. Götzendienst und Zauberwesen bei den alten Hebräern und den benachbarten Völkern. Regensburg, 1877. S. 69–96 (§ 7: Zauberei und Wahrsagerei); S. 127–133 (§ 12: Die Teraphim). Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. – Siegfried C., Stade B. Hebräisches Wörterbuch zum alten Testament. Lpz., 1893. Zapletal. Grammatica. – Zapletal V. Grammatica linguae Hebraicae cum exercitiis et glossario. Paderborn; Schoningh, 1902. Zeller. Worterbuch. – Zeller H. Biblisches Wörterbuch für das christliche Volk. Gotha, 1866. 2 Bde. Brockhaus. – Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron. [T. 32a: “Teraphim”, “Therapists”; T. 17 articles: “Lara”, “Laurels”; T. 23: “Penates”; T. 17a: “Lemurs”, etc.]. Glagolev. Essays. – Glagolev S.S. Essays on the history of religions. STSL, 1902. Part 1: Religions of the most ancient cultural peoples. Gesenius. Grammar. – Jewish grammar by W. Gesenius / Trans. K. Kossovich. St. Petersburg, 1874. Levner. Legends. – Levner I.B. Jewish legends according to the Talmud, Midrashim and other primary sources / Transl. from Hebrew edited by author... Warsaw, 1903. Lopukhin. Story. – Lopukhin A.P. Biblical history in the light of the latest research and discoveries: The Old Testament. St. Petersburg, 1889. T. 1. Palmov. Idolatry. – Palmov M. Idolatry among the ancient Jews. Palmov. Opinions. – Palmov M. Scientific opinions on the origin of idolatry among the ancient Jews // Kh. 1897. Issue. 7. pp. 130–145. St. Filaret. Notes. – Filaret (Drozdov), St. Notes guiding a thorough understanding of the Book of Genesis, including a translation of this book into the Russian dialect. St. Petersburg, 1819 2. Part 3. Flavius. Antiquities. – Josephus Flavius. Jewish antiquities / Trans. from Greek G. G. Genkel. St. Petersburg, 1900 2. Fustelde Coulange. Community. – Fustelde Kulanzh N.D. The civil community of the ancient world: Studies on worship, law, institutions of Greece and Rome / Transl. E. Korsha. M., 1867. [- I had to use this very old and poorly developed edition, since the new edition was not found in the library]. Chantepie de la Saussay. Story. – Chantepie-de-la-Saussay P.D. Illustrated history of religions / Transl. with him. edited by V. N. Linda. M., 1899. [- “Israelites”. Essay by Prof. I. Valetona]. § 1. Hypotheses about the etymology of the word teraphim The origin of the word teraphim (Therafim, Terafim, Théraphim, Theraphim, etc.), in Hebrew תרפים or, with vocalization, תְּרָפִים, is rather unclear. “ תְּרָפִים,” says the dictionary of Siegfried 7 1i and Stade 8 2i, “Wort dunkler Etymologie und Bedeutung... 9 1s,” and Stade with Siegfried leave the etymology unclear. 10 > Gesenius 11 leaves it unclear in the same way. 12 3i Having cited existing hypotheses about the origin of the word תְּרָפִים, he concludes the article with the words: “Haec sunt potiores maxime doctorum recentiorum de hoc sententiae, reliquas ut coniecturas incertissimas manifestosve errores praetermitto. Et ego quidem illarum sententiarum nullam admodum probo, certiora mihi quoque non suppetere, quibus haec quaestio difficillima dirimatur. Verum ut dicam quid in hac causa existimem, ea sententia quam secundo loco (and in this work in § 1 under No. XIII P.F. >) posui, ceteris mihi videtur esse anteponenda 13 2s.” Indeed, reading the list of existing hypotheses, one gets the impression of the complete arbitrariness of these hypotheses. But, if you look more closely at them, it is easy to see that some of the hypotheses certainly cannot be maintained and therefore fall away, others merge together, presenting only apparent contradictions to each other, so that, in the final analysis, there are not many possibilities left for choice. So, let us first indicate the main and most serious of the hypotheses that explained etymon of the word תְּרָפִים, but first let’s see what can be said about the very form of the word תְּרָפִים or, in transcription, t e rā φ îm (t e rāp h îm), ending in ים -, there is a plural, probably masculine, since such an ending is predominantly characteristic of the masculine gender of names. At the same time, it is important to pay attention to the fact that “the ending – îm,” according to Gesenius, 14 – (except for the Hebrew language. – P.F. >) also prevails in Phoenician. Instead of this ending, Aramaic has -îн, Arabic ŷн (in the name of the fallen) and -îн (in the indirect pad.), Ethiopian - -âн...". We will see that this remark will be useful to us later. But what does this form of the plural (Pluralform) express: is it genuine plurality, that is, the characteristic of a certain group of objects, or the quality of a single object? Mehrzahl 15 3s or Majestätsplural 16 4s ? 17 Now we cannot resolve this issue, since we do not yet want to take the word תְּרָפִים in context. But we will subsequently need to take this circumstance into account and will even need to take into account that the plural form, in addition to its usual meaning, in Hebrew can also mean: α) extensionem localem 18 5s; β) abstracta 19 6s, as, for example, נִעוּרִים 20 4i – iuventus 21 7s, זְקֻניִם – senectus 22 8s, הַיִּים – vita 23 9s, רַחֲמִיִם 24 5i – misericordia 25 10s, etc.; γ ) internam multiplicationem (i.e. grandam speciem pluralis majestatici) 26 11s, as, for example, להִים אֱ 27 6i – Deus 28 12s, אֲדֹנִים – Dominus 29 13s, etc. 30 However, sometimes those just given examples refer to the case of abstracta “It is currently customary to think, states Palmov, 31 that the plural form, both in Hebrew and in other Semitic languages, serves to form abstract concepts from lower or more concrete ones. In this case, the word elohim will be identical with Deity, Deitas, Θειότης, Gottheit." But, of course, this interpretation of the word להִים אֱ 32 7i does not in any way exclude the previous one. It is important to pay attention to this, since the word תְּרָפִים, as it becomes clear from the analysis of the text, can have three meanings: 1) as an ordinary plural; 2) as an abstract concept and 3) as a pluralis majestatis, indicating power, greatness, strength, etc. Let us now move on to a review of hypotheses about the origin of the word תְּרָפִים. I. One of the common hypotheses derives the root תרף, which underlies the word תְּרָפִים, from the Syriac word tōrēp h, which means to inquire, interrogate or test (percontare) 33 8i, and it is said that the teraphim got their name from the fact that they were approached with questions, to which they received the desired answers. According to this hypothesis, teraphim would mean: “an idol to which the power was attributed to predict the future,” or “an idol of divination.” Among other researchers, Metropolitan Philaret 34 joins this hypothesis; it is zealously defended by M. Palmov, considering this opinion “the most probable.” “In view of the Aramaic origin of the teraphim (Gen. 31; Ezek. 21), he says, “it is more natural than all others, who see the root of the word teraphim in Arabic, Chaldean, Ethiopian and other languages, since it indicates the root of the word in the Aramaic language, in the language of the people (Arameans), to which the teraphim owe their origin. On the other hand, this explanation is most consistent with biblical data, according to the meaning of which teraphim had the meaning of idols of divination, answering questions that were addressed to them.” 35 Against this hypothesis, however, it should be noted that the ending ִ ים is not particularly characteristic of the Aramaic (or Syriac) language, 36 9i but is characteristic of Phoenician. 37 But, even if we neglect this remark, then, all the same, it does not have behind it that main foundation - the authority of Bahr-Bahlul, 38 39 10i - on which it rests primarily. The fact is that Edmund Castellus (Castellus) 40 11i, who in his “Seven-Language Dictionary” (Lexicon heptaglotton) 41 12i first introduced such an opinion about the origin of the word תְּרָפִים, was based on a misunderstanding 42 of the Syriac text of the Bar-Bahlul dictionary, 43 13i “whose words Castell poorly read and understood,” 44 namely, Bar-Bahlul says that it would be in vain (inanis) for the opinion to be drawn that images (simulacra) have the name teraphim because they are asked and consulted about doubtful and hidden things. 45 12 And if so, then the main basis for accepting this hypothesis launched by Castell - the authority of Bar-Bahlul - loses its force. 46 14i II. Some of the Jewish commentators (see: Tanchum Hieros. Ad Jud. 17 and 1 Sam. 15; 47 15i Pocock. Comment. in Hos. P. 147 sq. 48 16i), considering teraphim identical with idols, derive the word תְּרָפִים from the Chaldean word תּוּרְפָא, which means abomination, muck, turpitudo, foeditas, in the same sense in which the Jews spoke about idols and pagan gods (de diis fictiis 49 14s) שִׁקּוּּץ and תּוֹעֵבָה, shikkutz and toeva 50. 51 17i The word tûr e p h â, or tûr e φ â, can, in addition to the indicated form תּוּרְפָא, also, according to Buxtorf 52, 53 18i, have the form תּוּרפָה or even תּוֹרֶף, which generally means turpitudo, pudendum, foeditas, ignominia 54 15s. "In Zohar in Gen. col. 376 legitur...: “Dixit R. Josë Quid fuerunt Theraphim? Idolum fuerunt. Quare autem nominatum fuit תרפים ? Propter ignominiam, juxta (i.e. “as” .– P.F. > id ubi discimus, התורף במקום 55 19i id est, in loco turpitudinis, vel pudoris aut ignominiae.” In Tanchuma in sect. ויצא haec etymologiaconfirmatur his verbis: "Quare vocantur Theraphim? Propterea quod sunt opus turpitudinis et opus foeditatis 56 16s "". 57 Elias Germanus 58 20i translates the word תרף in his Tishbi 59 21i as “maison de turpitude,” i.e., house of idolatry. “Le Targum,” he says, “s’est servi de ce mot dans le Ps. 44, où il y a dérision et moquerie. Les parties naturelles d’une femme s’appellent aussi, beth tourpa, et dans la Langue Latine pareillement cela s’appelle turpitudo 60 17s.” But the words tourpa and tourpata, according to Jurieu 61 22i, were borrowed by the Chaldean paraphrast and Talmudists from the Latin language, like thousands of other words found in the Chaldean and Syriac languages. Therefore, the words torep and turpā 62 23i cannot be sources for the formation of the word teraphim. 63 This theory, which Gesenius characterizes as “levis interpretatio” 64 1g, is supported by the authority of the interpreters who defend it; but, taking into account that it is unlikely that the fans of the teraphim began to call them “abomination,” we must once again speak out against such a hypothesis. It is true that in Laban’s conversations with Jacob 65 2g no one calls them teraphim, but they call them elohim; but it can hardly be assumed that the abusive word is introduced in other places in the Bible instead of the proper name of the objects we are considering, especially since the word תְּרָפִים is also mentioned where condemnation is not heard in the tone of the story. III. – Ewald 66 24i makes the assumption that the word תְּרָפִים means the same as the Arabic word pānîm, פָנִים 67 25i which means Mienen, facies, persona, larva, face, appearance, 68 “et iccirco tale nomen simulacris illis (i.e. תְּרָפִים) inditum (i.e. attached, attached. – P.F. >), quia capiti eorum persona (mask. – P.F. >) adiecta est. Sed neque hoc constat, Theraphos personatos fuisse, neque etymon illud certis stat rationibus 69 18s "; 70 teraphim, says Ewald, can be derived from the Arabic word 71 26i and then they will mean "nickende Angesicht oder lebende Maske 72 19s", so the teraphim are quite consistent with the lares, as dii larvarum, gods of masks. Perhaps we can also make a comparison of the word pānîm with the Latin word panion, found in Apuleius in the sense of “satyrion” (satyrion – vox graeca 73 20s, denoting the plant “cuckoo tears” (Plinius) and a drink from this plant (Petrunius). In all likelihood, this word is in connection with the word Satyrus, so panion denotes something having something to do with Satiram; this brings the said hypothesis closer to hypothesis VI. To explain Ewald’s hypothesis, one could cite the well-known custom of the Roman cult of ancestors to keep in the house masks removed from the faces of deceased ancestors through thin metal (gold) leaves, and the custom of the Japanese (in Shintoism) to have sacred images of ancestors. One might think that the teraphim really have a connection with the cult of the souls of deceased ancestors; This, by the way, is indicated by the subsequent hypothesis. However, there is hardly any valid philological evidence to connect the word תְּרָפִים with the word pānîm, especially since there is no evidence to state anything about the presence of masks among the teraphim. However, we will return to this issue in §. 74 27i IV. – In meaning, or rather in general result, the one that wants to see the beginning of the word “teraphim” in the Ethiopian verb meaning superfuit, remansit, that is, remained, abode, comes close to the previous hypothesis. 75 28i In this case, teraphim will mean some objects left over from deceased ancestors, i.e. souvenirs or relics (Reliquien). 76 No matter how ingenious the meaning of this hypothesis may be, it can be said with almost certainty that the common name for these relics in Syria could hardly have been borrowed from the Ethiopian language. V. – E. Meier 77 29i in Lex. radd. hebr. 78 30i p. 382 “Theraphim esse putat simulacra relicta majorum qui vita excesserunt 79 21s.” Thus, in its general meaning, this Mayer hypothesis comes very close to the previous two; but Mayer’s etymological basis is completely different; he, precisely, compares the word תְּרָפִים with some Arabic word denoting “close relatives, such as father, mother, sister, cousins ​​(patrueles).” 80 31i Exactly the same Sam. Lee, 81 32i in Lex. Hebr. 82 33i, speaks favorably of this hypothesis. 83 In the following, a number of hypotheses will be indicated, apparently excluding each other, but, in fact, in all likelihood, representing only different aspects of the same hypothesis. It is very possible that this hypothesis belongs to the same group. VI.– Hitzig 84 34i and J. D. Michaelis 85 35i in “Dissert. de Theraphis" (Comment. in Soc. Reg. Gotting. prael. 86 36i), then Lengerke 87 37i (Lengerke Kenaan 88 38i I. S. 256f.) compared the teraphim with monkeys, Sileni or Satyrs and, accordingly, translated their name through the Greek τράγος 89 22s (comment. in proph. min. ed 1, ad Zach. 10, 2 90 39i); these researchers derive תְּרָפִים from the Arabic trp h h τρηφάω or τριφάω 91 40i and relate it to the words trp h h 92 41i upturned upper lip and ˀtrp h h 93 42i person with upturned upper lip (ein Mensch mit einer solсhen Affenlippen). Without setting out the details of this hypothesis, which can be found in Jahn, 94 we will also note that this comparison of the indicated authors is based on incorrect word formation, and soon the authors themselves abandoned it, so that Hitzig even put forward a new hypothesis (see XVI). VII. – A hypothesis mentioned in passing by Ludov. de Dieu, 95 43i and then, in the 40s of the XIX century. defended by Hofmann 96 44i (Hofmannus in Schriftbeweis 1. p. 328), 97 45i is based on a comparison of the word תְּרָפִים with the word s e rap h îm, שְׂרָפִים, denoting the highest angels. This hypothesis identifies these two words and, accordingly, considers teraphim to be idols depicting an angel. 98 The same hypothesis, identifying the Teraphim with the Cherubim and Seraphim, is defended by Gaffarel, 99 46i holding that the Hebrew word שְׂרָפִים comes from the root שור, bull, while the analogous Chaldean formation would be תְּרָפִים from the word תור (thor - bull), since the Hebrew ש in the Chaldean language often turns into ת. 100 47i Gaffarel borrows his explanation from the treatise of a certain Moncaeus 101 48i (de Vitulo aureo 102 49i), but, says Jurieu, 103 “L’autorité de ces deux ercivains ne me paraît de grand poids, Gaffarel est destitué de jugement. C'est un conteur plaît de citations fausses. Moncaeus est un grand parleur 104 23s"; it is true that he understands something in Holy Scripture, but he did not know Jewish literature and did not know how to read Hebrew: “c’étoit au reste un grand diseur des choses inutiles... Le sentiment de ces deux hommes ne merite pas grand respect 105 24s”; but they rely on St. Jerome 106 50i: “Theraphim,” says St. Jerome, – proprie appellantur μορφώματα, id est figurae et simulacra, quae nos possumus in praesenti dumtaxat loco (precisely in the present place P.F. >), Cherubim et Seraphim, sive alia quae in Templi ornamenta fieri jussa sunt, dicere... sine Ephod et Theraphim, id est, instrumentis sacerdotalis habitus.” 107 25s Jurieu certainly rejects this etymology based on an analysis of the context showing 1) the unsacred and illegal nature of the teraphim and 2) the absence of teratomorphism in the teraphim. In view of the fact that the hypothesis equating the teraphim and seraphim belongs to the main group of hypotheses that will be discussed below, we will provide some explanatory remarks. We have already talked about the meaning of the plural in the Hebrew language, which allows us to express with it (the plural) the principle that makes an object what it is, and, in addition, an individual object, in connection with this principle, which indicates a certain completeness, power, and diversity of the object. Let us give more examples of such plurals; and thus we will explain what meaning the plural of the word תְּרָפִים has. 1. שָׂרָף plur. שְׂרָפִים – poisonous snake of the desert; a winged dragon living in the desert; the name of a special type of angel, but only in the plural. 108 2. כְּרוּּב ; plur. כְרֻּבִים or כְרובִים – “heavenly beings; originally - the personification of thunderclouds that carry the god of thunder (Donnergott the thunder god?). This concept of the Kerubs probably developed under the influence of Assyro-Babylonian views...” 109 3. אֱלוֹהַּ ; plur. אֱלהִים – God and gods. It is important for us (later) that this word אֱלהִים 110 51i was also used about the spirits of the dead (for example, Isa. 8:19 111 52i); therefore, the word can mean the collective dii manes 112 26s, as well as it can mean “Divinity” (Gottheit), “Divine essence” (Göttliches Wesen) (for example, Isa. 45, 14, 21, etc.). But in addition, and this is especially important, the word לֹהִים אֱ can speak about a separate divine being: about Jehovah, about the spirit of the deceased (1 Sam. 28:13), about a pagan god (Judges 6:31; 11:24). 113 4. בַּעַל ; plur. ב בְְּּעָלִים – rulers, princes; owner 114 5. Available only in the plural פָנִים – person and persons 115, etc. Here, everywhere the plural, in addition to its own meaning, also has the meaning of the singular and refers to a single object (“plur. pro sing.”). All these formations are similar to the word תְּרָפִים or its other existing feminine form, undoubtedly collective, תְּרָפוֹת , 116 117 53i so it is natural to consider its beginning תָּרָף 118 54i or (we will see the reasons for this later) to see in the form תָּרָף ָ result of destruction of the weak glottal ending ֵ א ,– ָ ה , – ָ א – or ֵ ה -. If so, then the beginning of the word is תְּרָפִים or we must recognize: תְּרָפָא , תְּרָפָה , תְּרָפֵא or תְּרָפֵה ; in the same way, the beginning of the word שְׂרָפִים will have to be considered: שְׂרָפֵא, שְׂרָפָה, שְׂרָפָא or שְׂרָפֵה. 119 55i Similar connections between the teraphim and the seraphim and kerubim were made, by the way, by Reuss 120 56i and Ferrière 121 57i. 122 However, Jurieu certainly rejects the convergence of teraphim and kerubim in content, because he considers kerubim to be “mystical animals”, and teraphim to be humanoid figures. 123 VIII. – Kircherus 124 58i says that “the word Theraphim comes from Serapis and that the Teraphim and Serapins in Egypt were images with a human head sitting on the body without arms and without limbs, after the manner of the Egyptians, who did not give limbs to their statues, ne aliquid ex illis membris decideret collisione aut putrefactione, quod illis magnum piaculum erat 125 27s. Serapis comes from שראבי, the prince is my father, le Prince mon père." 126 IX. – Maurer 127 59i (Commentary on Hosea. 128 60i 3, 4) and Ewald (Lex. hebr. 129 61i) identify the beginning of the word תְּרָפִים with תָּרַף or טָרַף, ṭarap h, which means tore off, tore off, decerpsit, and equate the last word to the consonant word, tore, decerpsit, and equate the last word to the consonant word denoting compartment, resecuit, amputavit. 130 In parallel to their considerations, one can also point out the word תַּרְפְּתָא – punctura, caesura, 131 27s, as for example, דסיבורי תרפתא – punctura scalpelli chirurgici 132 28s (Kethuboth. f. 39. Col. 2). 133 If we accept this interpretation, then, according to Maurer, it is applied to teraphim in such a way that he thinks that “teraphim” designates an image truncated to the chest, in Ferrière’s expression, “herm”; according to Maurer, teraphim - “sint simulaсra pectore tenus efficta, hermarum e genere 134 29s”, trunci (trunks, logs), caudices (blocks). This interpretation, by the way, corresponds to the transmission of Aquila, who precisely translates the word “teraphim” through προτομαί 135 30s (Hos. 3:4). It is interesting to compare this interpretation with the words given below (§) 136 62i from the book of the Wisdom of Solomon (Wisdom 13:11–19). X. The hypothesis of some rabbis, connecting the origin of the word תְּרָפִים with some of the rites of their cult, is as follows: “Dixit R. Jehuda Theraphim non fuerunt facta nisi horis certis et notis. Quare autem dicuntur Theraphim? Quia deprimunt, et remissas faciunt manus hominum, juxta (as P.F. >) id quod dicitur הֶרֶף, remitte manum tuam (2Sam. 24, 16). Hic R. Jehuda voluit תְּרָפִים esse a radice רָפָה , quia avocant cultores suos a laboribus suis, et remissas reddent manus ipsorum. ...(ad hanc) etymologiam accedit R. Bechai, inquiens: ...vocabulum תְּרָפִים deductum est a locutione נִרְכִּים (i.e. תְּרָפִים a radice רָפָה , laxum, remissum esse) et vocet ea תְּרָפִים quasi רָפִים (laxa, remissa, infirima) ad indicandum, quod verba ipsorum sunt quasi נְבוּּאָה רָפָה prophetia laxa, inanis et vana 137 31s". 138 The arbitrariness of such an interpretation of the root, clear in itself, becomes even clearer when we present the following hypothesis, starting from the same root, but giving the word תְּרָפִים a completely different meaning. But it should be noted that the root indicated here is the same one that is indicated by the majority of hypotheses and which, for various reasons, is very thoroughly accepted as true. XI. The root רָפָה, according to Gesenius, 139 means “remissus fuit, laxus fuit, collapsus fuit,” that is, “was released, was weak (loose), was collapsed, decrepit,” and this expression is used (dicitur): 1) de manibus remissis 140 32s, 2) de ipsis hominibus 141 33s, 3) de alis rebus 142 34s. From the root רָפָה or רָפָא the word רְפָאִים is derived, which is used only in the plural. These are the Rephaim, “manes orci umbri mortuorum in orco degentes (i.e. living), quos sanguine et vi vitali ( נֶפֶשׁ neque tamen animi viribus plane destitutos sibi fingebant veteres Haebraei Ps. 88, 11, Prov. 2, 18. Gr. Venet. νεκροί, in Prov. 21, 16 τεθνηκότες 143 35s "Usually this word “Rephaim” is translated through giants, giants (gigantes), etc. due to the fact that the Rephaim had a great body and were cast into Orc for their sins. But, according to another opinion, these Rephaim have nothing in common with those Rephaim, the giants; these are troglodytes. Finally, a third opinion is expressed that they are simply dead, for the word רְפָאִים can mean debiles, flacidi and therefore quicti, i.e. inhabitants of the kingdom of darkness and silence (דּוּּמָה, שְׁאֹל) XII. From the same root רפה, some 144 explain the origin of תְּרָפִים in the sense that they are objects that weaken, make piety sluggish, “parceque les Idoles relâchent la piété 145 36s” (Jurieu). Here we will have to say the same thing that was said about hypothesis I, namely, that the admirers of the teraphim could not call them by a name expressing a disapproving attitude. XIII. The same (XI) assumption, namely that תְּרָפִים is the same as רְפָאִים, and that both words come from the root רָפָא, are justified even differently, talking about the new meaning of the root רָפָא. Among its other meanings, this root also has the meaning sedavit, quietavit 146 37s. From this the meaning for the word רְפָאִים is immediately obtained as quieti, the dead. 147 XIV. Fuerst 148 63i (Fuerstius. Concordantia 149 64i) and Delitzsch 150 65i (Delitzsch. Comment. üb Genesis. 151 66i P. 410) 152 the word תְּרָפִים explain in the sense of feeders and nourishers, breadwinners (altores et nutritores) and are compared with the word הִטְרִיף (hit e rîp h), used in the sense of supplying food, nourishing (cf. Proverbs 30:8: “Feed ( הַטְרִיפֵנִי ) me with my daily bread”). This hypothesis may not be so far from hypothesis VIII, because the word הִטְרִיף, according to Delitzsch, comes from טָרַף, which means to tear ( טָרַף – discerpere), for example, to tear food with the teeth (dentibus cibum); in Russian, this is analogous to the affinity of the words “eat, kushanye” with “bite, bite, bite.” XV. The hypothesis defended by Lud is almost identical to Conjecture XIV. de Dieu, A. Schultens 153 67i, Eichhornius 154 68i, Gesenius, Hamburger 155 69i, some rabbis (Targum Jonathan zu 1 M 31) 156 70i and “many of the latest Hebraists" (Gesenius). According to it, teraphim comes from the Arabic tārap h āh, 157 71i which means: to enjoy the benefits of life, to enjoy the benefits and conveniences of life, as explained by Palmov, or, in the causative meaning, to give benefits, prospérer, according to Ferrière; Gesenius gives the translation of this word as follows: bonis commodisque vitae affluxit, vel iis fruitus et laetatus est, vitae commoda largitus est, commoditas fortunae ac vitae delicatus bonus, bonis commodisque vitae abundans 158 38s. With this etymology of the word תְּרָפִים, teraphim receive the meaning of idols, gods, to whom the power of protection of domestic happiness and well-being is attributed, i.e. the meaning of penates and lares; “inde (i.e. from the said Arabic word P.F. >), says Gesenius, “dios penates תְּרָפִים dictos esse putarunt ut vitae fortunaeque commodioris praesides et largitores, qui ad amplificandum et tuendam rem domesticam colerentur 159 39s.” A similar opinion affects Castellus, Jurieu and others. In addition, Gesenius considers it possible to compare with this word some Ethiopian words meaning: superfuit 160 40s, abundans 161 41s, 162 72i, which is why the word teraphim itself takes on the meaning opera supererogationis 163 42s. “Als Hausgötter,” says Scholz, “galten sie (die Theraphim) für die Ernäher und Erhalter der Familie, weshalb sie den Namen Teraphim haben, d. i. Erhalter, Ernӓher ( תָּרַף – nähren, speisen dem arabischen taripha und dem hebräischen טָרַף sich sättigen, hilf. 164 73i – speisen, ernähren) 165 43s ". If the word tārap h a should not be retained for some reason, then Delitzsch thinks, according to Schenkel, to be satisfied with the Hindu word tarp, well-fed, satt, which is related to the Greek τρέφω - I feed. 166 > XVI. Gitzig, having rejected the hypothesis VI previously defended by him, subsequently (see his Commentar üb. Ezechiel. 167 74i P. 149) made the assumption that תְּרָפִים comes from the root רפא, more precisely, from the word רָפָא, which means healed, cured. Gitzig brings this word rāp h â or rāp h ah closer to the Greek θεραπεύω - I heal, heal, save, so according to this explanation it turns out: תְּרָפִים θέραπες, i.e. teraphim - the same as gods, who have acquired the power to heal people, as Xenophon says (Memoral. Socratis I, IV 10) 168 75i, οἱ θεοὶ θεραπεύουσι τούς ἀνθρώπους, 169 76i or, as Schenkel explains the same hypothesis, 170 77i teraphim are gods who are, as it were, servants of people, Diener. It is interesting to compare with what has been said the name of the sect of therapists, or therapeutids; They received their name θεραπευταί, according to Philo, from the verb θεραπεύω - “either for the art of healing, which heals the soul, or for the veneration of that being that is better than good itself.” 171 Hamburger also adheres to this hypothesis about the etymology of the word teraphim, and Jurieu expressed it earlier than all of them, declaring: “Je ne saurois douter que le mot Grec θεραπεύειν, therapeuin, qui signifie servir et adorer, ne vienne du mot Theraphim 172 44s.” 173 XVII. Almost the same opinion is defended by Jurieu. “Il est clair,” he says, “que les Theraphims viennent de רפא, Rapha, qui dans les langues Orientales signifie conserver, guerir.” Je soupçonne qu’au commencement ces Dieux s’appeloient מְרָפִים Meraphins, c’est a dire Sanatores, Dii Sospitatores, Dieux Tutelaires, Dieux conservateurs, parceque le Thau et le Mem des Hebreux ont pû être facilement changez de l’un à l'autre. Mais sans cela, le nom de Theraphim sera dérivé du future du Pihel, dans la seconde personne תרפה , therappé, qui signifie tu gueriras, c’est la forme d’invocation, dont les idolatres se servoient, pour invoquer ces Dieux Tutelaires. Ensuite de ce verbe therappé, on a fait un nom pluriel, Theraphim, qui signifie Dieux conservateurs & guerisseurs... Le mot Grec θεραπεύειν , qui signifie guerir, n’est une nouvelle preuve que les Theraphims étoient les Dieux Tutelaires, Dii servatores et Sospitatores. Il me semble que l'on ne peu nier que le Grec θεραπεύειν ne vienne de Theraphim, car il n'y a point de changement. Et pourquoi les Grecs auroient ils empreinté le verbe, qui signifie guerir, de ces Idoles, si ce n’est parceque ces Dieux étoient estimez les conservateurs de la santé, & la prosperité de la famille? 174 45s. 175 § 2. Summary of the previous and general conclusion about the etymology of the word תְּרָפִים Taking into account the proposed hypotheses and the analysis made, we can with a high degree of probability synthesize most of the most solid hypotheses in this way: the word תְּרָפִים or, in a rarely used form, תְּרָפים, comes from the root תרף or, more specifically, from the root, the mode of which is the word רָפָא and רָפָה. This root רפא has as its meaning the concept of restoring and maintaining the integrity of something in some respect, as a result of which רָפָא receives the following differentiated meanings: 1) consuit, sarsit, i.e. sewed (for example, a torn dress), stitched; Gesenius compares with this the Greek ῥ άπτω 176 46s and sees the onomatopoeic root (radix onomatopoëtica) רף as the basis of רָפָא, analogies to which Gesenius points out in the Latin rapiendi and carpendi 177 78i, German raffen and rupfen and compares with them גָּרַף 178 47s , חָרַף 179 48s , טָרַף 180 49s . 2) sanavit 181 50s, for example, a wound. According to Buxtorf, this verb has the following meanings: mederi, sanare, curare, sanari 182 51s, etc., so hence רפֵׂא or רב ֿ פֵא – chirurgus, medicus 183 52s; רְפִיאָה – medicina, medicamentum 184 53s, sanitas, salus 185 54s etc. Similarly, in Greek ἄκεσθαι – sarcire et sanare, mederi 186 55s; ἀκεστής 187 79i – sartor 188 56s et medicus 189 57s; similarly in Russian “heal” (heal) – both “make whole” and “heal” (heal). To clarify the meaning of this relationship between the words stitch (make whole) and heal (heal), Gesenius very successfully quotes a humorous remark from Luther, who called doctors “the tailors of the Lord our God” (unseres Herrn Gottes Flicker). This last meaning of רָפָא is in turn differentiated, meaning: a) to treat in the proper sense; b) to cure or cure in the sense in which God is said to heal a person, a people, a land, etc., that is, to restore them to a state of happiness; c) in the sense: God forgives sins, frees us from shortcomings; d) to console, in the sense of restoring the soul. With this we can compare the double meaning of the word heil - holy and healthy (among the Germans), the consonant words sanus and sanctus - healthy and holy in Latin, and finally, in French sain and saint, i.e. whole, healthy and holy. Thus, by saying that רָפָא means “heilen” (Stade und Siegfried), we almost adequately convey the essence of this root רפא. 3) A more distant meaning of רָפָא – sedavit, quietavit 190 58s in the sense in which, for example, it is said that medicus dolorem sedat 191 59s, in which tranquility is considered as bringing to a perfect, complete state (cf.: “in a green place, a place of peace, where there is no sickness, sorrow and sighing, but endless life”, i.e. peace, as fullness, richness, completeness and integrity of life). 4) Finally, another meaning is רָפָא – fed, nourished 192 80i, since nutrition is a means of maintaining life “whole”, or “whole”. In addition, the root רָפָא also has the exact opposite meaning, namely, “to make incomplete” 193 81i - a phenomenon very characteristic of ancient languages, examples of which can be found at least in Max Müller’s “Science of Thought” 194 82i 195 83i. – From here the particular meanings of רָפָא follow: 5) tear, cut off. 196 84i 6) let go, lower, weaken, stop. By saying that the word ת תְּרָפִים comes from רָפָא, we want to say that it captures the very root with all the shades contained in it. Emphasizing one or another shade leads to the creation of a particular hypothesis, which by no means excludes the other, because the creation of the word תְּרָפִים must be considered very ancient (as we will see, this word is associated with the ancestral cult that emerged in the most ancient periods of human history), when the roots still contained in an undifferentiated form, in potency, in integrity and non-fragmentation, the variety of private meanings to which they later broke up. Approximation with the word רְפָאִים, which expresses, so to speak, one side, one moment of the word תְּרָפִים, forces us to admit that in the concept of teraphim the shadows or souls of the dead are somehow thought of; It is most natural, on the basis of comparative folklore and very simple psychological considerations, to conclude that these are not souls in general, but the souls of persons close to us, ancestors. From here, moments of salvation, preservation, nutrition, healing are naturally thought of, since ancestors and parents, in particular, are natural patrons and protectors of all descendants from all kinds of misfortunes. The rapprochement with seraphim and cherubim emphasizes the well-known supernaturalism in the teraphim, which makes them the subject of a special cult. Thus, the analysis of the word תְּרָפִים leads us to draw an analogy between the teraphim and heroes (ἥ ρωες 197 85i), the penates and lares of the Greco-Roman world, with the highly revered souvenirs of ancestors in Shintoism, with the tombs of ancestors, the highly revered Chinese and other eastern peoples. But before we carry out this analogy in more detail, we must more precisely determine the way in which the word תְּרָפִים originated from the root רפא. We have seen that, according to Jurieu, the transition point is the imperfectum (or fiens) of Piel in the 2nd person masculine singular, i.e. the form תְּרַפֵּּא 198 86i, which means: “you save many times,” “you will save many times,” “you heal many times,” etc. The letter א in Hebrew is guttural weak; “in Aramaic the sound of the consonant א is even more gentle than in Hebrew.” 199 Consequently, in the word תְּרַפַּּא this א disappears, as well as the pataḥ that precedes it. Further, since dagesch forte cannot stand at the end and since the disappearance of the guttural must be compensated by the softening of פּ, then this dagesch disappears; but then in return, according to the rule of compensation, the previous patah changes into kamets. It turns out תְּרָף. In the plural, if this sentence is given the meaning of a name (as in German or French the addition of a member can make a single syntactic element similar to a noun from a sentence, or the same in Russian by placing quotation marks), the result is תְּרָפִים, which is well conveyed by the words “saviors”, etc. 200 87i § 3. Translations of words into other languages 201 Ancient translations of the Bible, made at a time when the tradition about the meaning of the word תְּרָפִים could still be preserved, differ greatly in the way they convey this word; however, it does not follow from this that their transmissions were incorrect; they just do not convey the full content of the word תְּרָפִים, but they emphasize with particular sharpness one or another moment of this word. By indicating the main methods of transmission, we thereby more accurately noted those aspects that are present in the word תְּרָפִים. 1°. – LXX interpreters either leave the word תְּרָפִים untranslated (Judges 17 and 18; 1 Kings 15:23; 2 Kings 23:24), simply transcribing it in Greek letters in the form θεραφείν (according to Jurieu, θεραφείμ 202 88i), or convey תְּרָפִים with general expressions like τὰ εἴδωλα 203 60s (Gen. 31:19, 34; cf. Philo Allegor. lib. 2 opp. I 74 204 89i), γλυπτοί 205 61s (Ezek. 21:26), κενοτάφια 206 62s (1 Sam. 19:13, 16), ὁ ἀποφθεγγόμενοι ( Zech. 10:2), i.e., “speaking”, and δῆλοι (Hos. 3:4), i.e., “discovering” or “explaining,” which, according to Scholz, indicates (hingedeutet) the cult associated with them, which has its essence in fortune-telling (Orakelwesen); It is characteristic that the word אֻרִים 207 63s is also translated through τὰ δῆλα, i.e. the same word as תְּרָפִים. 2°. – Aquila declares the teraphim to be προτομαί (1 Sam. 19:16), i.e. “Brustbilder” 208 64s, for the gens of the Herms or for μορφώματα, i.e. figurae, simulacra, as Jerome explains (in Quaest. in Gen. 31) 209 90i; in the text from Hosea (3:4) Aquila translates the word teraphim through φωτισμοί 210 65s. 3°. – Symmachus et Gräcus Venetus translate the word in question through εἴδωλα. 4°. - The Chaldean translators, or rather paraphrasts, render תְּרָפִים by צַלְמָנַיָּא, which means “images”, “image”, “portrait”, “imagines, simulacra”; and sometimes - through דמאין, which means “resemblance” (rassemblence), and, finally, once (Hos. 3:4) through מֵחַוֵּי, which means “indicans” 211 66s, meaning “futura” 212 67s. Onkelos, Pseudo-Jonathan, the Syriac and Arabic translations and the Vulgata agree to explain תְּרָפִים in the sense of imago, simulacrum, figura. The Syriac translation calls (Judges 17 and 18:14, 17) the teraphim periso 213 91i, and with this word it designates elsewhere (Ex. 27:7; 28:4, 8; 1 Sam. 2:19; Ps. 109) a tunic (tunica - Brustschild, as Scholz translates this word) or high priestly robe (Ex. 28:15), or “breastplate of judgment.” According to this, in the Arabic translation in the corresponding places of the Book of Judges, instead of teraphim, there is “clothing worn (anziehen) harioli,” i.e., fortune tellers, sorcerers or fortunetellers. In the same way, regarding the translation of the passage from Hosea (3:4) LXX, Jerome, as appears from his letters to Marcellus, ranks the teraphim among the instrumentis sacerdotalibus habitus 214 68s (Comm. in Hos. 3 215 92i). 216 The Genevan translators, according to Jurieu, 217 imitating the Chaldean paraphrasts, translated the word תְּרָפִים through Marmousets 218 69s. § 4. Places from the Bible where the word תְּרָפִים is found We have already indicated what opinions were formed about teraphim based on the study of their very name. Now we will present the considerations that have been expressed about teraphim based on the study of context and tradition. Let us note that here, despite the apparent diversity of hypotheses, there is quite a large unity between them; but in order to discern it, we must remember the difference in sources and the difference in eras in which these opinions were expressed. First, however, it is necessary to review those places in the Bible where there are any mentions of teraphim. 219 1°. – (Gen. 31) Jacob leaves Laban: “And Jacob (יַעֲקֹב) arose, and set his children and his wives (that is, Leah (לֵאָה) and Rachel (רָחֵל)) on camels (17), and took with him all his livestock and all his wealth, which acquired his own cattle, which he had acquired in Mesopotamia, (and all his own) to go to Isaac his father in the land of Canaan (18). And as Laban went to shear his cattle, Rachel stole the idols that her father had. (19)…Jacob left with everything he had…(21).” When two days later, on the third day, Laban is informed of Jacob’s flight, Laban sets off in pursuit, chases for 7 days, overtakes him and reproaches him for fleeing furtively; ““But let you go,” he addresses Jacob, “for you were impatient to be in your father’s house, why did you steal ( גָנַבְתָּ ) my gods ( אֶת־אֱלֹהָי )?”” (30). (And Jacob said): “Whoever you find your gods with ( אֶת־אֱלֹהֶיךָ ), he will not live; In front of our relatives, find out what I have of yours and take it for yourself. (But he didn’t learn anything from him). Jacob did not know that Rachel (his wife) had stolen them. (32) And Laban went to the tent of Jacob, and to the tent of Leah, and to the tent of the two servants (that is, Zilpah ( זִלְפָּה ) and Bilhah ( בִּלְהָה 220 93i )), (and searched), but he did not find it. And he left Leah's tent and entered Rachel's tent (33). Rachel took the idols and placed them under the camel's saddle and sat on them. And Laban searched the whole tent, but did not find it (34). She said to her father: Let not my lord be angry because I cannot stand before you; for I have an ordinary feminine ( נָשִׁים דֶּרֶךְ ). 221 And (Lavan) searched (throughout the whole tent), but found no idols ( אֶת־הַתְּרָפִים) (35). Jacob became angry and entered into an argument with Laban... (36).” After Laban and Jacob concluded a treaty, “Lavan rose early in the morning and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. And Laban went and returned to his place (55).” (Gen. 35). – Some time after this event, “God said to Jacob: Arise, go to Bethel and live there, and build there an altar to God, who appeared to you when you fled from the face of Esau your brother (1). And Jacob said to his house and to all who were with him: cast aside the strange gods ( הָסִרוּ אֶת־אֱלֹהֵי הַנֵּכָר ) 222 94i , and purify yourself, and change your clothes (2); let us arise and go to Bethel; there I will build an altar to God, who heard me in the day of my trouble and was with me (and kept me) in the way that I walked (3). And they gave Jacob all the foreign gods that were in their hands, and the earrings that were in their ears. at them; and Jacob buried them under an oak tree ( הָאֵלָה ), 223 which is near Shechem (And left them unknown even to this day.) (4).” 2°. – (Judges 17). – “There was a man on Mount Ephraim named Micah ( מִיכָיְהוּ ) (1). He said to his mother: The thousand and one hundred shekels of silver ( הַכֶּסֶף ) that were taken from you and for which you cursed me in front of me, this silver is mine, I took it. His mother said: Blessed is my son with the Lord! (2) And he returned to his mother the thousand and one hundred shekels of silver. And his mother said: I dedicated this silver from myself to the Lord for (you), my son, to make ( לַעֲשֹׂוֹת ) an image and a cast idol ( פֶּסֶל וּמַסֵּכָה ); 224 so, I give it to you (3). But he returned the silver to his mother. His mother took two hundred (NB) shekels of silver and gave them to the smelter. He made an image and a cast idol out of them, which was in Micah’s house (4). And Micah had the house of God ( בֵּית אֱלֹהִים ). And he made (וַיַּעַשׂ) an ephod and a teraphim (אֵפוֹד וּתְרָפִים) and dedicated one of his sons to be his priest (לְכֹהֵן) (5). In those days Israel had no king; everyone did what seemed fair to him (6).” It further tells how Micah invited a certain young Levite from Bethlehem of Judah, from the tribe of Judah, to serve as his priest, and assigned him a salary of “ten shekels of silver per year, necessary clothing and food (10).” “And Micah said, Now I know that the Lord will do good to me, because the Levite is my priest (13).” (Judges 18). – The tribe of Dan was looking for a place to settle, and sent five elected representatives to inspect the land. These latter stopped for the night at Micah's and talked with the young Levite. Having learned about the nature of his occupation, “they said to him: ask God ( שְׁאַל־נָא בֵאלֹהִים ), so that we can know whether our path on which we are going will be successful (5). The priest said to them: Go in peace; your path wherein you go is before the Lord (6).” They went and, satisfied with their search, advised “their brothers” (Danites) to occupy the land they were inspecting - Lais. 600 armed men actually went on a campaign and camped in Kiriath-jearim. “From there they went to Mount Ephraim and came to the house of Micah (13). And the five men who went to spy out the land of Laish said to their brothers: Do you know that in one of these houses there is an ephod, a teraphim, an image and a cast image ( אֵפוֹד וּתְרָפִים וּפֶסֶל וּמַסֵּכָה )? So, think about what to do (14). And they went there and entered the house of the young Levite, the house of Micah, and greeted him (15). And six hundred men of the sons of Dan, girded with weapons of war, stood at the gate (16). And the five men who went to spy out the land went and entered there, and took the image, and the ephod, and the teraphim, and the molten image. וְאֶת־הַמַּסֵּכָה )…(17)…the priest said to them: What are you doing? (18)". Then the Danites began to point out to the Levite the benefits of joining their service and luring him to join them. “The priest rejoiced, and took the ephod, the teraphim, and the image (and the molten image), and went with the people (20).” Micah and his neighbors set off in pursuit of the sons of Dan “and shouted to the sons of Dan. (The sons of Dan) turned around and said to Micah: What do you need, that you shout so much? (23) (Micah) said: You took my gods ( אֶת־אֱלֹהַי ) 225 95i , which I made ( אֲשֶׁר־עָשִׂיתִי ), and the priest, and went away; what else? How do you say: what do you want? (24)". To this, those accused of theft pointed to their numerical superiority, and Mikha, seeing that they were indeed stronger than him, was forced to give up his demands. “And (the sons of Dan) took what Micah had made, and the priest who was with him, and went to Laish (27).” Having burned the city and exterminated the inhabitants of Lais, they built themselves a city and called it Dan. “And the sons of Dan set up an image for themselves ( אֶת־הַפָּסֶל); And Jonathan the son of Gershon the son of Manasseh, himself and his sons were priests in the tribe of Dan until the day of the migration of the inhabitants of that land (30); and they had with them the image (אֶת־פֶּסֶל) made by Micah (מִיכָה), all the time that the house of God (בֵּית־הָאֱלֹהִים) was in Shiloh (31).” 3°. – (1 Samuel 15, and according to the Jewish account, 1st book of Samuel 15). – During the war with Agag, Saul violated the direct command of the Lord and allowed the people to spare “the best of the sheep and oxen for sacrifice to the Lord God ( לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ 226 96i)” (15 and 21). Then Samuel, according to the revelation given to him during the night, condemned Saul in the following words: “Are burnt offerings and sacrifices as acceptable to the Lord as obeying the voice of the Lord? Obedience is better than sacrifice, and submission is better than the fat of rams (22); for disobedience is the same sin as sorcery (קֶסֶם), 227 and rebellion is the same as idolatry (וּתְרָפִים וְאָוֶן); 228 because you have rejected the word of the Lord, and He has rejected you, so that you should not be king (over Israel) (23).” 4°. – (1 Samuel 19, and according to the Jewish account, 1st book of Samuel 19). – In a fit of possession by an evil spirit, Saul decided to kill the husband of his daughter Michal (מִיכַל), David (דָוִד). “And Saul ( שָׁאוּל ) sent servants to David’s house to keep him and kill him until the morning. And Michal his wife said to David: If you do not save your soul this night, you will be killed tomorrow (11). And Michal let David down from the window, and he went and ran away and was saved (12). Michal took the statue (אֶת־הַתְּרָפִים) and laid it on the bed, and at its head she put a goat skin (כְּבִיר הָעִזִּים) 229 and covered it with clothing (13). And Saul sent servants to take David; but Michal said, He is sick (14). And Saul sent servants to examine David, saying, Bring him to me on the bed, to kill him (15). And the servants came, and behold, on the bed there was a statue ( הַתְּרָפִים ), and at the head ( אֶל־הַמִּטָּה ) 230 97i its goatskin (16).” 5°. - (2 Kings, and according to the Jewish account, 2nd book of Kings, chapter 23 231 98i). – The high priest Hilkiah found the book of the law. Having learned its contents, King Josiah undertook religious reform. He destroyed all the temples, services on high places, abolished pagan cults, destroyed altars and cut down sacred groves. After such a radical cleansing, the celebration of Easter was restored. As if to coincide with this holiday, the final cleansing of their state, “the callers of the dead, and wizards, and teraphim, and idols, and all abominations (וְגַם אֶת־הָאֹבוֹת Home Josiah destroyed the words of the law written in the book which Hilkiah found in the house of the Lord (24).” 6°. - (Ezekiel 21, and according to the Jewish account of Ezekiel 21, chapter verse 26, 27). “And the word of the Lord came to me” (18), says Ezekiel. – “The king of Babylon stopped at a crossroads, at the beginning of two roads, for fortune-telling ( לִקְסָם־קָסֶם): 234 shaking the arrows ( בַּחִצִּים), asking ( שָׁאַל ) the teraphim ( בַּתְּרָפִים), considers the liver ( בַּכָּבֵד רָאָה ) (21). In his right hand he holds a fortune-telling: “to Jerusalem”... (22). “This fortune-telling ( הַקֶּסֶם ) 235 100i seemed false in their eyes ( ַוְהָיָה לָהֶם כִּקְסָם־שָׁוְא ) 236 101i ; but since they swore an oath, he, remembering their treachery, decided to take it (23).” “... a sword, a sword drawn for slaughter, cleansed for destruction, so that it flashes like lightning (28), so that, while empty visions are presented to you and false fortunes are told to you, you too may be placed among the beheaded wicked ones, whose day has come when their wickedness will be put to an end (29).” 7°. – (Op. 3). “The Lord said, (1) For a long time the children of Israel will remain without a king and without a prince and without a sacrifice, without an altar, without an ephod and a teraphim (4) 237 102i . 238 After this the children of Israel will return... (5).” 8°. – (Zechariah 10). – “Ask the Lord for rain in your time of need; The Lord will flash lightning and give you abundant rain, and for everyone there will be grain in the field (1). For the teraphim speak empty things, and the prophets see false things, and tell lying dreams; they console with emptiness; therefore they wander like sheep, they are in misery, because there is no shepherd (2)" Please contact us 239 103i 240 § 5. Analysis of the cited passages of the Bible (see § 4) We have cited those places in the Bible in which teraphim are mentioned. From the analysis and comparison of these places, a whole range of data can be extracted regarding what teraphim are; however, the comparison of places must be approached extremely carefully and after a preliminary analysis of each place separately, since they belong to very different eras and, therefore, in the given texts the word teraphim may not mean the same object. This, of course, would not be worth talking about if most researchers did not jumble the texts together in order to produce a summary analysis. 1°. – This story provides a lot of valuable data for considerations about teraphim. First of all, it is characteristic that Rachel decides to steal the teraphim, that her father Laban is not surprised by her determination, but simply demands the stolen property back, as he would demand his property in general; the same shade can be heard in Jacob’s response to Laban, admitting that the elohim are Laban 241 104i, that they are his property. It is also characteristic that Laban does not say: “our elohim,” which would be the case if the teraphim were an object of public cult, but says: “my elohim.” Next, Rachel hides the teraphim under the camel’s saddle, that is, either under herself, or in the side pocket of the saddle, if we assume that the saddle had the appearance of a “khurjin” still used in the East, i.e., a carpet cloth with pockets sewn on its ends and thrown over the back of a horse, mule, donkey or camel over the pommel. This determination of Rachel to put the teraphim anywhere shows that for her they were a thing that had no special meaning; but for Rachel, brought up in her father’s house, the teraphim could hardly seem unimportant if for Laban they constituted an object of cult 242 3g. However, there is still a difference in attitude towards teraphim on the part of Laban and Rachel (the influence of Jacob?). The father does not search her saddles, but is it necessary to think that this is done out of pity for his daughter, because of her painful condition? The matter is explained by the reason why Rachel refuses to get out of the saddle and which forces Laban to leave Rachel alone. “Rachel,” says Josephus, 243, “prudently hid the idols in the holster of the camel she was riding on, and she sat on it, saying that her monthly purification had come. Under such conditions, Laban refused further search, believing that his daughter in such a state would not dare to approach the idols.” The meaning of this passage from Josephus becomes especially clear if we remember that in ancient times, among most peoples, if not all, a woman in a state of monthly purification was considered unclean. This was also true for the Jews. Thus, Rachel does not treat the teraphim with respect; for Laban they are a thing, but a thing that has some sacred meaning. It is true that Josephus states that “Rachel took with her the images of the gods (which Jacob taught her to despise),” 244 and Laban, in his reproaches to Jacob constructed according to all the rules of eloquence (in Josephus) says: 245 “You left, stealing and taking with you your native deities, highly revered by my ancestors and enjoying considerable respect on my part.” It is true that in parallel to this passage from I. Josephus one can point to the stories of rabbis who seek to put Laban in a ridiculous position, seeing in the very fact of Laban’s claims the absurdity of his beliefs. Here is the legend told by the Talmudists: 246 “Having overtaken Jacob,” say the Talmudists, “Lavan said to him: “Why did you run away from me and take away my daughters as captives, without even allowing me to say goodbye to them? Not only that, you also stole my gods!” At Laban's last words, Jacob and his children blushed and lowered their eyes. Noticing this, Laban thought that the innocent children were ashamed of their father’s action, and asked them why they were blushing. - Oh, grandfather, we were very ashamed of you! - the children answered. - Why is this? – Laban questioned further. “You, grandfather, are already old and grey, and yet you speak senselessly, like a child.” If your idols were truly gods, how could anyone steal them!? “Ashamed of this answer, Laban did not find what to answer and fell silent.” It is also appropriate to note that a similar idea was expressed by Rev. Philaret: 247 “Why did you steal my gods?” With this complaint, Laban seems to intend to depict the absurdity of idolatry: for what kind of gods are these that can be stolen; and for the violence suffered should they expect justice from their reader, instead of protecting him himself? “In order to understand how this absurdity was not noticed, it should be noted that subtle worshipers of idols ascribed to them the Divinity not by nature, but by the participation of the invisible Divinity, which, as they thought, was united with them through dedication.” So, it is true that the Talmudists interpret the word אֱלֹיםִהִ as “gods” (although it can mean, for example, souls, etc.); but this fact does not prove anything yet: reading Jewish legends (see: Levner. Legends), you notice the tendency of the rabbis to denigrate Laban in every possible way and exalt Jacob in every possible way (especially see Levner pp. 91 (65), 98 (69), 100 (70), 103, etc.). This follows from the desire to fundamentally condemn all religious phenomena not related to the cult of Jehovah; Indeed, by attributing all sorts of shortcomings to Laban, the rabbis thereby prepare the ground for saddled with idolatry and thus presenting the latter as a natural consequence of moral lowliness. In ch. Genesis 35 Jacob, wanting to build an altar to God, decides to first cleanse his family of all traces of pagan cults and for this purpose orders him to abandon the foreign gods. In response to this order, his household give him “all the foreign gods that were in their hands, and the earrings that were in their ears.” It is not known whether we are talking about teraphim or some other “gods” here, but in any case from the context [in Art. (4)] it follows that those “foreign gods” and “earrings” are subsumed under the broader concept of “foreign gods” [in Art. (2)]. Consequently, those “gods” in question were something similar in meaning to earrings. “Under “foreign gods,” says the Reverend. Philaret - of course here, firstly, the idols stolen from Laban by Rachel, and secondly - since Jacob’s speech is addressed to his entire household and to everyone who was with him - the idols of slaves acquired in Mesopotamia. Other interpreters also add idols taken in Shechem.” 248 > Be that as it may, in order to find out what kind of “gods” these are, it is necessary to turn to the parallel word “earrings”, נְזָמִים. “Here,” says Philaret, “we must understand not a simple decoration used by the female sex, but one that served as some kind of talisman and which Bl. Augustine calls idolorum philacteria, repositories of idols.” 249 In letter 245 250 105i Augustine, in addition, notes: “Execranda autem superstitio ligaturarum (i.e. pendants, amulets of P.F. >), in quibus etiam inaures virorum in summis ex una parte auriculis suspensae deputantur, non ad placendum hominibus, sed ad serviendum daemonibus adhibetur 251 70s "252 106i. The custom of most uncultured peoples is to wear earrings in the form of an amulet to protect the ear holes from the influence of evil spirits (i.e., having the same purpose as the Russian custom of baptizing the mouth when yawning, so that the devil does not enter the 253 4g mouth), this custom has survived even to this day in the form cultural experience (cf.: Ohrringe // Riehm. Handwörterbuch. Bd. 1). Genesis we are talking about just such earrings-amulets. And that earrings (maybe not amulets) were worn by all the people in general, this is clear from the 32nd chapter of Exodus, which tells how “Aaron said to them [the Jews]: take out the gold earrings ( נִזְמֵי ) 254 107i that are in your ears your wives, your sons and your daughters, and bring them to me (2). And all the people took the gold earrings ( אֶת־נִזְמֵי ) 255 108i out of their ears and brought them to Aaron (3). He took them from their hands, and made a molten calf out of them, and dressed it with a chisel (4).” If Jacob connects the construction of the altar with the destruction of the earrings, then it is obvious that they were not just decoration, but were in some way related to the pagan cult, and therefore, they were talismans, as something tolerable for the time being in ordinary life and unacceptable during the rise of religious consciousness. Consequently, the teraphim, if only by elohim they are meant, were something of the same kind, i.e., intermediate between the legal in the full sense and the objects of the cult of Jehovah and the absolutely illegal idols in the literal sense of the word. In Joshua 24:2 the following passage is read regarding Terah, the father of Abraham: “And Joshua said unto all the people, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel: Beyond the river ( בְּעֵבֶר הַנָּהָר ) 256 109i your fathers lived of old, Terah ( תֶּרַח ), father ( אֲבִי ) of Abraham ( אַבְרָהָם ) 257 110i and father of Nahor, and served other gods ( אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים ) 258 111i "." Note that “beyond the river” means in Ur of the Chaldeans, since Abraham’s ancestors first lived there and then moved to Harran. In this Ur of the Chaldeans, says Joshua, they worshiped other gods (אַחֵר 259 112i - another, alien, according to Stade p. 27). Perhaps these “other gods” had some connection with the teraphim, but we do not have more definite data to resolve this issue, since the Bible passages (Gen. 11:24–32; Num. 30:27; 1 Chron. 1:26; Luke 3:34) mentioning the name of Terah do not say a word about his idolatry. But it is hardly possible to trust the Talmudic tradition, which has a clear tendency to exalt the forefathers by condemning everyone around them. 260 In connection with this, that is, with the magical connotation of the cult of the teraphim, one of the functions of the teraphim becomes clearer: in other times, the teraphim performed, among other functions, fortune-telling. It would be interesting to resolve the question of whether they had the purpose of a fortune-telling instrument for Laban. There are no direct indications of this, but indirect ones hint at an affirmative answer. In Gen. 30 Laban says to Jacob: “Oh that I would find favor in your sight! I notice that the Lord blessed me for you.” This “note,” however, does not convey the real connotation of the word נִחַשׁתִּי, although in Philaret (St. Philaret. Notes. p. 76) and Mandelstam (Mandelshtam. Torah. p. 40) it is translated almost the same way, namely: “I experienced.” נִחַשׁתִּי , Piel 1 sing. perfecti from נָחַשׁ, i.e. characterizes an intense action over the object of the action: “Pi’el est activum exprimans intensivam occupationem cum re per verbum expressam. Habet significationem: iterativam, causativam, privativam 261 71s ". 262 But נָחַשׁ means 263 "to take an omen", οἰωνίζεσθαι or augurium capere in the broad sense, "eine Vorbedeutung entnehmen (durch Beobachtung der von der Gottheit zur Belehrung über ihren Willen gesandten Zeichen) 264 72s ". So, נִחַשׁתִּי means “I learned by fortune telling” (this is how it is conveyed in the English commentary of the Bible, according to Palmov (Palmov. Idolatry. P. 188)), augurando cognovi (Keil. Comment. üb. Genesis, 246) 265 113i, or more precisely, “learned through attentive, diligent, intense fortune telling.” What kind of fortune telling exactly? To answer this question, we need to turn to the word נָחַשׁ itself. It can come 266 either from נַחַש, plur. נְחָשִׁים, 267 114i which means "vorbedeutende Zeichen, οἰωνός" 268 72s and "das Entenhmen eines vorbedeutenden Ζ eichens" 269 73s, or from נָחָש (and in status constructus נְחַשׁ 270 115i ), plur. נְחָשִׁים 271 116i, i.e. snake, Schlange, serpens. It is clear that the first meaning of the word, more abstract, does not exclude the second, and then נָחַשִׁ will mean “learned through fortune-telling by snakes” or simply “learned through some fortune-telling.” This is how this word is actually interpreted by Scholz 272 and Fromüller; “nichaschti,” says Scholz, “ich habe mir aus Schlangen weissagen lassen 273 74s”; but he also notes further: “Luther übersetzt es sonst durch: zaubern, auf Vogelgeschrei achten. Anderë ich ahne, vermuthe 274 75s ". It is hardly possible, however, to speak so decisively about the origin of the word נִחַשׁתִּי. The fact is that 275, in addition to the form נָחַשׁ, the form נְחַשׁ (augurari, ominari) is generally used from the word נְחַשׁ, נַחֵשָׁא or נְחַשׁ, which means augurium, and the latter itself begs for rapprochement with נְחַשׁ or נְחָשָׁא or also נְחשֶׁת – aes, cuprum, copper – or with the verb נָחַשׁ, aere obducere. And then the word נָחַשׁ will mean fortune telling using some kind of copper object. Remembering the custom of kilikomancy - κυλικομαντεία, i.e. fortune telling through a cup (κύλιξ - cup, glass, round bowl) - or hydromancy, or, finally, lekanomancy - λεκανομαντεία (λεκάνη - pool), which Jurieu brings together with Ov, אוֹב, among the Jews - the custom of fortune telling, which consisted of seeing special visions on the surface of clean water poured into a bowl, similar to the so-called “mirror visions” during catoptromancy, i.e. when fortune telling with a mirror, 276 we can probably say that נִחַשׁתִּי means: “I learned by divination by the cup.” Perhaps the bowl itself was copper, or perhaps, as was often done (even now done), Laban put some copper object (teraphim?) into a glass bowl of water, because fortune telling was generally done in two ways. To explain what has been said, one can cite more passages from the 44th chapter of the book. Genesis, where Joseph orders the ruler of his house to put a silver cup in his brother Benjamin’s sack, and then, having caught him in (alleged) theft, say: “Is this not the (cup) from which my lord drinks? And he tells fortunes (יְנַחֵשׁ) on it...” (5). Further, when the brothers are brought to Joseph, he says to them: “What have you done? didn’t you know that a person like me would certainly guess?” (15). It is remarkable that the same verb is used to denote fortune-telling with a cup as for Laban’s fortune-telling - the verb נָחַשׁ, which here expands its meaning and refers to a silver cup (this is like how we say “colored linen,” although “linen” is from the root word “white”). As an explanation of what has been said, perhaps what Rabbis Moses Ben-Nachman 277 117i and Rabbi Bechai 278 118i say (in commentaries on the book of Genesis) can also serve; they consider these very Laban teraphim as a kind of copper tables, similar to the solar quadrants 279 119i and having both astrological and magical meanings. With their help, they observed moments favorable for fortune telling, because this required a special position of the luminaries. Gaffarel attributes the same opinion to Aben-Esra 280 120i, but erroneously, since this latter, in his Commentary on the book. Being brings this opinion, rejects it. 281 So, we cannot say with certainty whether Laban’s teraphim served for fortune telling or not; but since, as we will see now, in later times teraphim undoubtedly had a fortune-telling meaning and more and more acquired the character of magical tools for fortune-telling, and since there is no doubt at all that Laban was engaged in fortune-telling, it is very natural to assume that he did this not without using teraphim. This is what can be said about the internal meaning of teraphim. Now we can move on to their external signs. Firstly, Laban had several teraphim. How much exactly? Although this is not said, it can be argued that not very much, because otherwise Rachel would not have been able to kidnap them without difficulty and hide them unnoticed from everyone, even from her husband. Indirect considerations (rapprochement with Lara and Penates) can indicate that there were exactly two teraphim, just as Lara was two. Further, from the fact that a sick woman could quietly carry away the teraphim, then lift them alone without outside help to the height of a camel's saddle (the height of the saddle is significant, even if we assume that the camel was kneeling at that time, as happens when it is loaded), we can conclude that these were not bulky objects (otherwise they would have been difficult to hide during the abduction and after, during a search, and not heavy (otherwise they it would be difficult to carry), that is, some figures. But we saw that for Laban they were of some kind of property value. Therefore, we must think that they were made of some valuable material - metal; if we make a comparison with the indicated word נִשְׁתִּי, and derive it from נְחַשׁ, we can assume that the teraphim were copper, more precisely, bronze or tombac (“Corinthian copper” 282 121i), because this material (especially tombak) was considered very valuable. Archaeological data (see § 9, p. 144) apparently confirm this conclusion. The question arises, why did Rachel steal the teraphim from Laban? In the context we find absolutely no indication of Rachel's motives; and since we make only more or less probable assumptions about the meaning of the teraphim, guesses about the motives for the abduction turn out to be doubly arbitrary. This arbitrariness affects, first of all, the unusually wide range in which the assumptions made are contained. The most important of them come down to the following main types. 283 1) Rachel stole the teraphim because of their value, in order to reward Jacob for his labors from Laban, or instead of her vein (see 7). 2) The purpose of the abduction was to deprive Laban of the opportunity, through questioning the teraphim, to learn about the flight and the direction of Jacob’s path and thereby prevent Laban from pursuing his son-in-law. Rabbi Eliesar (ch. 32) 284 122i says: "...Theraphim locuta sunt... Propterea furata est eos Rachel, ne indicarent Labano, fugisse Jacobum 285 76s." 286 3) Rachel wanted to take revenge on Laban for his ill-treatment of Jacob and for this purpose she stole what was the most valuable and most revered in the house (see 7). 4) Rachel wanted to take away her father’s idols and thereby free him from idolatry. “During her preparations, Rachel took her father’s idols and hid them under her dress; she hoped that, having lost the idols, her father would abandon idolatry.” This is how some of the Talmudists explain the matter. 287 The wise Rabbi Abraham Aben Esra 288 123i in his commentary on Genesis 31 notes: “Quidam dicunt, Rachelem furatam fuisse ea (h.e. תְּרָפִים), ut aboleret idola a patresuo. Quod si est, quare abduxit ea secum, et non potius occultavit ea in via? Verisimile est, Labanem patrem ejus fuisse peritum astrorum, eamque veritam, ne pater inspiceret astra, cognosceretque quonam fugerint 289 77s". 290 5) According to Josephus, “Rachel took with her the images of the gods (which Jacob taught her to despise), so that if they were overtaken by her father during the persecution, she could have refuge with them and more easily persuade him to forgive.” 291 This interpretation is rather ambiguous, since Rachel could not hope for “refuge” with the teraphim if she despised them; and it was hardly possible to hope for her father’s forgiveness because she, the kidnapper, would return the teraphim herself, since this kidnapping was one of the reasons for Laban’s anger. 6) Let us recall what was said about the etymology of the word teraphim and compare it with the statement of Josephus, 292 that “in Mesopotamia there is still (i.e. in the first centuries A.D.) the custom of taking household gods with you on journeys,” with the custom that existed among the Greeks and Romans, when colonizing or separating part of a family, to take fire from the hearth and penates with them, with the name Aeneas penatiger, finally, with the Russian custom, when moving to a new hut, take with you the rubbish and fire from the old one. All this was done (at least initially) in order to attract "the household gods by whom the happiness and blessing of the family rests" (Riehm): "In der Absicht dies Glück an ihre Schritte zu fesseln, nimmt Rahel ohne Vorwissen ihres Mannes den Theraphim ihres Vaters Laban auf die Flucht mit 293 78s." 294 7) Rev. Philaret discusses this as follows: 295 “Rachel’s theft cannot be explained either by her own superstition, since she did not respect the stolen idols (34) 296 5g, or by simply opposing Laban’s superstition, for for this purpose Rachel could have destroyed them or hidden them in an empty place, without exposing herself to the danger of a search. One can attribute to her the special intention of a) shaking the courage and all the hopes of Laban at their very foundation, so that, deprived of his gods, he would be all the more afraid of irritating the God of Jacob; and b) to use, under the righteous protection of this God (16) as a testimony of fidelity to one’s spouse and for the law of the age (14, 15), what was most important, and perhaps most precious, in the father’s house.” 8). Finally, we can indicate another hypothesis arising from the views on the teraphim Fr. Creuzer 297 298 124i and Wien 299 125i, who see in the teraphim household gods, making the family many children: “...das alte Pelasgevolk,” says Creuzer, “den Bildern seiner Ehegötter auch die Kraft des Fruchtbarmachens beigelegt haben mag. Gerade in den Samothracischen Religionen finden wir ein geheimnissvolles Bewahren der Idole. Etwas Aenliches bemerkt man in der Hausreligion der Ebräischen Erzväter. Rahel, die sich so lange nach Kindern gesehnt hatte, bewahret sehr sorgfältig und heimlich jene Theraphim (Genesis 31, 19 und andere Stellen) 300 79s.” Creuzer compares the teraphim with the Cabiri, who had a phallic meaning among the Pelasgians, and equates the teraphim to “fruchtbarmachende Penaten 301 80s". 302 General conclusion. The rabbinic hypothesis, which attributes to Rachel the desire to free her father from idolatry, seems to us to be decidedly untenable. If even Jacob, who personally received revelations from God, and was brought up outside the veneration of the teraphim(?), did not particularly disdain them, so that he endured them for 20 years in the house of Laban and then for some time even in his own house, then on what basis can we assume that Rachel, raised by her father, herself, without a revelation from God (which would not have been kept silent in the narrative if such a revelation had happened, and even without the advice of her husband took on an idolatrous mission? But if we reject this hypothesis, then all the rest, due to the above generalized hypothesis about the etymology of the word תְּרָפִים, can be reduced to one, more general one, which does not exclude the rest. Teraphim are amulets invariably associated with household spirits beneficial to the family, most likely ancestors; teraphim - breadwinners and nourishers, preservers of the clan, patrons of childbirth, healers of diseases, saviors from evil spirits, from the evil eye; they connect generations and are an image of blessing from ancestors to descendants; perhaps it can be said that the positive of the teraphim (the negative, manic will be said later; but it also existed, and in the duality of the nature of the teraphim lay the need for them to split into positive and negative aspects) subsequently molded into the custom of passing on from generation to generation, from generation to generation, family icons along with the blessing of parents departing to Eternity to children; Teraphim are endowed with special powers; they help to recognize the hidden and discover the future. But, besides all this, they - directly, as things, have value. If so, then Rachel’s goal was, first of all—first of all, not in the sense of the special height of this goal, but in the sense of the greatest naturalness of setting it—first of all, it was to take possession of all these benefits for her family, and on the other hand, to deprive Laban of them, partly, perhaps, out of revenge, partly, in order to discourage him and deprive him of the strength to pursue. All these motives, if we only take into account the psychology of a living person, diverse, complex and containing a whole network of motives, thoughts and feelings, and not school psychology, dissecting and crushing the products of distraction - all these motives not only do not exclude one another, but also naturally go hand in hand, discharged in the form of a more intense action. 2°. – Micah’s mother gave the smelter 200 shekels of silver; “out of them he made” an image, פֶּסֶל, and a cast idol, מַסֵּכָה. The Babylonian-Hebrew shekel weight (Gewichts-Sekel) is approximately equal to our lot of 16.67 gr. 303 Therefore, the weight of the idol and the image taken together was 16.67 x 200 gr. 3334 gr. or 3,334 klgr, which gives approximately 8 pounds with shot. Further, Micah “made” (עָשָׂה) the ephod (אֵפוֹד) 304 126i and the teraphim (וּּתְרָפִים). This, by the way, shows the improbability of the rabbinic opinions that every teraphim was the head of a human corpse; the word “made” shows that the teraphim was something artificial, made. The story goes on to say that the young Levite, lured by the Danites, “took the ephod, the teraphim, and the image.” The Hebrew text does not say that he also took a cast idol, but since it is mentioned further and since in this story any three of the four objects are often mentioned: an image, a cast idol, an ephod and a teraphim, it is natural to assume that the priest carried it too. From this we can conclude that the entire weight of his burden was 8 pounds (the weight of the cast idol and idol the weight of the ephod with teraphim); since the weight of this burden could not be particularly great, then the weight of the ephod with the teraphim is all the more small, and the weight of the teraphim (or teraphim?) is even more small. So, in this case, the teraphim was a compact object (otherwise it would have been difficult to carry) and of insignificant weight. In the above story, the said objects are always mentioned together, but sometimes one is omitted, and in terms of meaning it is obviously implied. This indicates that they, these 4 objects, are not independent of each other, but form some kind of unity. What this unity is is not clear from the context, and this question can hardly be resolved without any additional information. But we think it is not without interest to present Ewald’s hypothesis 305 - fantastic, but witty. Soviel wir indeß aus den zerstreuten erwähnungen derselben (Teráfîm oder Hausgötter Iraëls) schließen können, he says, verhielt es sich mit ihnen folgendermaßen. Ein solches bild bestand nicht aus einem einfachen stücke, sondern wenigstens wenn der besizer auf ein geschmückteres (more decorated P.F. >) und vollständigeres werth legte, aus meheren theilen. Der einfachste kern selbst aus stein oderauch aus holz gefertigt ( פֶסֶל ist ursprünglich nur ein steinbild, bezeichnete aber allmälig auch jedes gözenbild, Ex. 20, 4 vgl. Richt. 18, 30, und hat eine so allgemeine bedeutung angenommen wie ξόανον ) mochte immer das bild eines menschenähnlichen gottes darstellen, auch in der größe einem menschen gleichen, schien aber doch schon in frühen zeiten leicht ansich zu schmucklos. Es erhielt also meist eine überzug aus gold oder silber, sei es am ganzen leibe oder nur an einzelnen theilen: daher die scharfe sprache der allen bilderdienst verabscheuenden strengeren Jagveverehrer spottend gerne von schniz- und gusswerk redete, den zweierlei dingen aus denen ein solcher göze zusammengesezt sei. Uebrigens versteht sich vonselbst daß wenn genug edle metalle dawaren, der göze auch aus bloßem gußwerke bestehen konnte. – Bisdahin wurde also ein hausgott, abgesehen von seiner besondern gestalt, ganz ebenso wie jedes andre bild eines gottes verfertigt: nun aber kam erst das besondere hinzu welches den uralten hausgott Israelitischer art unterschied. Um dies zu verstehen, muß man sich vor allem erinnern daß diese hausgötter vonjeher um orakel von ihnen zu empfangen gebraucht wurden; so daß die Terafim auch schlechthin für einerlei mit den orakelgöttern galten. Das bild erhielt zu diesem zwecke einmal ein Efôd d. i. einen prachtschmuk um die schultern (i.e. a magnificent headdress or outfit on the shoulders of P.F. >), woran auf der brust ein beutel (bag. - P.F. >) mit den zum orakel dienenden loosen angebracht war, ganz so wie dies unten weiter bei dem hohepriesterlichen schmucke beschrieben werden wird. Zweitens wurde auf sein haupt eine art maske (larve) gesezt, welcher der orakel suchende priester wahrscheinlich an irgendeinem zeichen ansehen sollte ob der gott überhaupt jezt ein orakel geben wollte odernicht. Diese masken machten erst das bild so vollständig daß man von ihnen diese götter selbst Terafim nannte (see: § 1, III P. F. >). Zugleich aber versteht sich hienach, wie Terafim bald als von größer menschenähnlicher gestalt bald als kleineren umfange und daher leicht z. b. unter einem kamelsattel verbergbar beschrieben werden können ( Gen. 31, 34 ): denn die beiden eigentlichen orakelstücke machten doch zumal bei einem längst vielbewährten und geliebten hausgotte die hauptsache aus. 306 81s Micah, apparently, is not condemned for the construction of the teraphim; Moreover, with a tone of slight condemnation, the fact is noted that the priest ( כֹּהֵן ) 307 127i at the teraphim, ephod, etc. was initially not a Levite, but his son appointed by Micah himself, i.e., from the tribe of Ephraim. “This is understandable,” as the narrator seems to want to say: “in those days Israel had no king; everyone did what seemed fair to him.” It is obvious, further, that Micah himself, although his action seemed fair to him, still felt in the depths of his soul its illegality, which is why he tried to find a real, legitimate priest - a Levite. And when Micah found such a one, he said with a relieved heart: “Now I know that the Lord will do good to me, because the Levite is my priest.” Thus, what worries Micah and the sacred writer is not the fact of the cult of the teraphim, but the illegal form of the cult; This circumstance, as well as the Levite’s consent to serve such a cult, as well as the religious disposition of Micah, show that in this era (NB) the teraphim did not contradict the religious consciousness of Israel. A similar opinion is expressed by Jurieu, 308 who directly states: “Les Theraphims de Mica etoient sonsacrez au vrai Dieu 309 82s.” Next, the Danites say to the Levite: “ask God” ( שְׁאַל־נָא בֵאלֹהִים ) 310 128i - God, and not the gods, since otherwise, one must think, the Levite would have refused to fulfill this request, but, meanwhile, he fulfilled it without hesitation. This means that the cult of Jehovah not only did not exclude, but was actually combined with the cult of the teraphim, and it is very likely that they served precisely for questioning. During the pursuit of the Danites, who stole his teraphim, Micah shouts: “You have taken my elohim that I made” - (אֶת־אֱלֹהִים). He is not surprised or angry at the blasphemy, but is only indignant that they stole his property, his property (characteristic remark: “which I did”!) and lured away his priest. The Danites, in response to this, instead of making any excuses, point to their numerical superiority and take away “what Micah did.” This makes it clear that the teraphim, as well as the ephod, etc., were not objects of cult in themselves for Micah, but were only sacred objects - objects related to the cult. It is interesting to note the parallels between the story of Micah and the story of Laban; both one and the other are deprived of their teraphim; both one and the other set off in pursuit of the kidnapper; both reproach the kidnappers for theft and demand their property back; It is interesting that both use the same expressions. Micah specifically says: “you took my elohim” ( אֶת־אֱלֹהַים ) 311 129i, and Laban - “why did you steal my elohim” ( אֶת־אֱלֹהָים ) 312 130i . 3°. – Here we meet the first example of an explicit condemnation of the teraphim. “Disobedience is the same as fortune-telling ( קֶסֶם das Orakel Suchen, consulting the oracle), and rebellion is the same as idolatry and teraphim ( וְאָוֶן וּּתְרָפִים ) 313 131i.” The phrase consists of two similar parts, which compare the concepts of fortune telling and idolatry with teraphim with homogeneous moral and religious concepts, disobedience and resistance. From the structure of the speech it is clear that the latter concepts must be homogeneous, that is, idolatry with teraphim must be an analogue of fortune telling. From here we see undoubtedly the connection between teraphim and idolatry that had been established by that time (the time of Saul’s reign), a connection so close that the function of divination is implicite contained in the concept of “teraphim,” just as disobedience is in resistance. In addition, from the further words of Samuel it is clear that God, for Saul’s disobedience, also retreats from him, as He would have retreated if Saul had used teraphim and idolatry. Here a note of undoubted condemnation of the teraphim is sounded, which was not previously heard: while Laban, despite the teraphim, was given an order in direct revelation not to offend Jacob, but nothing was said about the teraphim and fortune-telling, to Saul his guilt, equivalent to fortune-telling and teraphim, is imputed by mediated revelation (through Samuel) to such an extent that God leaves him. 4°. – The general meaning of this passage is that Michal deceived Saul’s detectives by making a figure resembling a sleeping man out of teraphim, clothes and goatskin. Josephus 314 conveys this passage as follows: “At night, the king (Saul) sent guards to his (David’s) house with the order to guard David until dawn, so that he would not run away or try to hide; then he wanted to put him on trial and execute him. Meanwhile, David’s wife, the royal daughter Michal, having learned about her father’s intrigues against her husband, began to be very worried about his fate, as well as for herself, because the death of her husband would have deprived her of the joys of life. Therefore, she came to David and told him: “Be careful that the rising sun does not find you here, otherwise you will no longer see it at all. Run while this night presents you with the opportunity to escape, and may the Lord God prolong this night for you. Know that if your father finds you, you are dead.” She then lowered him on a rope from the window and thus saved him. After that, she arranged the bed as if a sick person was lying in it, and put a goat’s liver under the blanket. When Saul's messengers appeared the next morning to seize David, Michal told them that her husband had spent a very restless night, that he was sick, and showed them the covered bed and the liver moving in it, assuring that it was David who was breathing so heavily. The messengers returned to the king and told him that David had fallen ill during the night. Saul, however, ordered David to be brought to him, even in this condition, because he certainly wanted to kill him. When the messengers returned to David’s house, they opened the bed and saw what a cunning trick Michalah had played on them, and reported this to the king.” In this interpretation, the conversation about goat liver seems strange; this understanding of the passage in question is based on the text of LXX, with which the Slavic agrees: “and Michal received the vain burial (τὰ κενοτάφια, hatt e rāp h îm), and laid it on the bed, and the liver of a goat (καὶ ᾗ παρ 315 132i τῶν αἰγῶν) put it on its head, and covered it with vestments” (1 Sam. 19:13). This difference in interpretation is probably due to the fact that the LXX did not read k e b h îr carpet, as in the Masoretic vocalization, but kāb h ed h or keb h ed h liver, ᾗ παρ 316 133i; 317 indeed, the word כביר, vocalized by the Masoretes as כְּבִיר, can easily be read as כבד, and then the proper vocalization gives כָּבֵד. But the latest authoritative biblical scholars consider this understanding irresistible, so that De Wette 318 134i, for example, puts in this place of the Bible “das Geflecht von Ziegenhaaren,” that is, “a tangle of goat’s hair.” This “braid” was obviously supposed to represent the hair of the sleeping David. It is clear that the figure of the teraphim had to be so large that its head was approximately equal in size to a human head; only in this case could Michal’s deception succeed; the goat's hair represented the hair of the imaginary David. In addition, one must think that in such an important matter Michal would hardly have trusted anyone’s help, and from the context it is not clear that she had accomplices. And if so, then it is natural to think that the weight of the teraphim was such that a young woman could easily handle its figure. However, the head of the teraphim is clearly distinguished in the text from the teraphim itself, and this shows that, in any case, it could not consist, as the rabbis think, of only the head (see verse 13). And since it is hardly possible to assume that the teraphim was empty inside, the easiest way is to assume that the teraphim was not a whole figure, but only had a head and a torso or part of a torso, i.e., it was a herm, a bust. The head mentioned in the text (“in the head of the teraphim”) shows that, indeed, it was something humanoid, anthropomorphic. The bust-like appearance is also indicated by the fact that Michal also needed a dress for the doll - obviously in order to depict the torso with them. It is also interesting to note that Michal clearly arranged the doll for deception, and, moreover, without the knowledge of her father. This means that she did not have much reverence for the teraphim and, in addition, it means that the teraphim was at the disposal of her, the woman. It is further important that Saul, reproaching Michal for deceiving him, says absolutely nothing about the illegality of her act in relation to the teraphim; but if the teraphim had been a shrine for Saul, then an accusation of sacrilege would inevitably have followed on his part. Consequently, for Saul, as for Michal, the teraphim does not represent any special shrine. According to Reuss 319, the teraphim is spoken of here in such a tone that it is clear that since the time of the historian who first spoke about this event, teraphim were still “well-known furniture in the Israeli economy.” But we cannot help but emphasize that the teraphim were precisely something like furniture. It is interesting to compare the story of Rachel with the story of Michal. In both cases, daughters deceive their fathers, who are religiously inferior to their husbands, for the sake of their husbands; and here and there they operate teraphim independently. Doesn't it follow from this that the teraphim at home were under the control of women? This idea is also suggested by the fact that this was the case with the Penates. 5°. – Here the teraphim are already directly connected with magic, necromancy and idols and are even assessed together with all this as גִּלֻּלִים and שִׁקֻּצִים, i.e. as something absolutely unclean and nasty, something absolutely intolerable by Jehovah. Ferrière 320 notes the following about this place: “the iconoclastic reform of Josiah shows that next to the private teraphim and therefore beyond the reach of (Josiah), there were also public teraphim exhibited for public veneration; only these latter fell under the blows of Josiah.” It is interesting to compare this remark of Ferrier with the opinion of Jurieu (see 6°) regarding the public teraphim that stood at crossroads. 6º. - From the above speech of Ezekiel it becomes clear that in his time the main, so to speak, function of the teraphim was fortune-telling and that the custom of “questioning them” was known not only to the Israelites, but also to the Babylonians. In the above passage, the “questioning of the teraphim” is presented as going in parallel with fortune-telling ( קֶסֶם ) through the “shaking of arrows” on which the corresponding inscriptions (lots) were made, and through the “examination of the liver,” probably from a sacrificed animal. It is impossible to decide whether these are all separate moments of one action, one fortune-telling, or whether they are completely independent of each other and coincidentally coincided at the same time of fortune-telling. It is very likely that by this era the sacrifice had already come to be considered necessary in order for the teraphim to answer questions. Then this will be the first indication of the gradually developing bloody cult of the teraphim, which reached incredible and monstrous manifestations in later times among the Sabians and all kinds of magicians. In the same speech of Ezekiel the condition of the Jews is described. “You, Israel,” the prophet seems to be saying, “are presented with empty visions and tell you false fortunes.” You believe them and now you must perish! It is not known whether we are talking about teraphim or some other fortune telling; but it is very natural to assume that genus is taken here, divination in general, and including species, divination by teraphim or with the help of teraphim. It can be seen that fortune telling was widespread among the Jews and found faith. The use of the same verb קָסַם (infin. from it קְסֹם and קְסווֹם 321 135i) as in relation to the Babylonian king telling fortunes with teraphim, hints that the fortune-telling of the Babylonians and the Jews is of the same order; This is why the assumption of fortune telling by the teraphim and on the part of the Jews is very likely. In connection with “false fortune-telling” “empty visions” are put. We can almost say with certainty that here we are talking about visions during catoptromancy or one of the subtypes of hydromancy - visions on smooth and shiny surfaces; and comparing this with what was said regarding Laban, one can think that these are the same visions that Laban had during his fortune-telling, for example, with kilicomancy. The punishments that Jehovah threatens for the fact that the Jews listen not to His prophets, but to fortune-telling, clearly highlight the illegality of all those rituals of which Israel is accused, and the severity of the punishments shows that fortune-telling and sorcery are already seriously attracting the masses of the people, and not just individuals. “The King of Babylon stopped at a crossroads, at the beginning of two roads.” Jurieu 322 thinks that this text indicates the custom of placing teraphim in niches, at crossroads, just as the Romans placed Dii viales, Dii compitales 323 83s - Lares with special functions to patronize roads and travelers - just as we sometimes put chapels at crossroads. Although this assumption, in connection with the other rapprochements between the teraphim and the Lares, seems quite possible, we must admit that there are no indications for it in the text and, perhaps, it is more likely to assume that the Babylonian king does not question strangers, but his own, domestic ones, his own teraphim, whom he takes with him on a journey (cf. the words of Josephus in § 5, 1°, 6) on p. 74). 7°. – Jehovah threatens the Jews with the deprivation of a king, a prince, a sacrifice, an altar, an ephod and a teraphim, from which we can conclude that the deprivation of all this was a grave punishment. The immediate impression from the text is that here the teraphim are placed on the same level as the absolutely legitimate phenomena of folk life - governance and sacrifice. This is quite unexpected after the previous texts, but if this understanding is correct, then one has to think that the word “teraphim” is used in a sense different from its meaning in other texts, for example, in the words of Samuel (1 Samuel 15:23). How this is possible, we will consider later, and now we note that the authority of LXX also speaks in favor of such an understanding of the matter, 324 which render תְּרָפִים in this place through δῆλοι - a word that these translators also used to translate the words “Urim and Thummim.” Thus, according to LXX, the meaning of this passage from the prophet Hosea is that the Jews “will be without the ephod, which is the robe of the high priest, and without the Urim and Thummim, which are placed in the ephod to give oracles, that is, that they will be deprived of the Spirit of prophecy.” Because of this authoritative translation of the LXX, St. Jerome (In cap. 3 Oseae) 325 136i thought that here teraphim directly designates Urim and Thummim: Verum, quia LXX δήλους interpretati sunt, pro quibus Aquila et Theodotio φωτισμούς transtulerunt, et haec ipsa sunt in Λογεί ῳ id est in Rationali. Hoс intelligimus quod in pectore et сorde Pontificis ἀλήθεια καὶ φωτισμός, id est veritas et doctrina inesse debeat 326 84s. In his dissertation on the Urim and Thummim, the English scholar Spencer 327 137i (Spencerus, dissert. de Urim et Thummim) 328 138i expresses an opinion similar to that just given. He thinks, namely, that the teraphim are the same as the Urim and Thummim, namely, small images of the human form, images that were placed on the breastplate of the high priest and through which God or the Angels, on instructions received from God, gave predictions. Spencer bases his views on the passage quoted from Hosea. However, this passage from Hosea can be understood in a completely different way, and this interpretation removes the tension that exists in the first. Ce passage d’Osée, says Jurieu, 329 – mal interpreté est cause de l’erreur de Gaffarel, de Moncaeus, de Spencerus, & de celle de S. Jerôme. Et la source commune de leur erreur, c'est que le dessein de Dieu, selon eux, est de prèdire que les Israëlites seroient un long-tems, sans le culte de Moïse. Mais la verité est que Dieu veut dépeindre précisement, l'état où sont aujourd'hui les Juifs, sans Dieu, ni vrai, ni faux, sans idolatrie, mais sans vrai culte. Pourtant d'un côté il dit, non ipsis erit Ephod, neque זבח , sacrificium. C'est-à-dire point de vrai culte Mosaïque, et selon la Loi. Mais d'autre part ils n'auront point de מצבה , statua, ni de Theraphims, point de statué et de Theraphims. C'est-à-dire qu'ils ne seront pas idolatres, ni payens adonnez à la magie. Or que les Theraphims ne se puissent prendre en bonne part, il paroît par le mot de Matseva, statué, qui ne se prend jamais en bonne part (NB), quand il s’agit d’une chose qui est adorée. Ainsi le sens du passage est, Un tems viendra dans lequel vous serez plusieurs siecles, sans adorer les statuës, mas aussi sans pouvoir consulter Dieu par Urim et Thumim, qui sont dans l’Ephod. C'est l'explication de Kimchi... Ils seront plusieurs jours sans Ephod, & sans Theraphims, 330 – says Jurieü c’est-à-dire qu’ils seront sans aucun oracle à consulter, ni faux, ni vrai, ni diabolique, ni divin, point d’Ephod, pour consulter Urim et Thummim, point de Theraphims, pour deviner par les Démons et apprendre par leur moyen quelque chose de leur destinée. Bien n'est plus clair et plus net que le commentair de David Kimchi sur ce passage. “Le prophete, dit-il (Rabbi D. Kimchi In Oseam, cap. 3) dépeint les jours de la captivité, dans laquelle nous sommes présentement. Nous n'avont point de Roi, car nous sommes sous la Domination des Rois des Nations, et de leurs Princes. Nous n'avons point de sacrifice, que nous offrions au vrai Dieu, mais aussi n'avons-nous point de statuë, ni d'Idole élevée à l'honneur des faux Dieux. Nous n'avons point d'Ephod sacré, qui nous apprenne les choses futures, par Urim et Thummim, mais nous n'avons point aussi les Theraphims consacrez aux Idoles, qui président les choses à venir, selon l'opinion de ceux qui croient en eux. Voilà nôtre état dans nôtre captivité. 331 85s Let us also note that Hosea and Reuss interpret the said passage in the same sense. 332 This interpretation seems the most likely, since it establishes a symmetrical understanding of the verse; The verse turns out to consist of three antitheses: 1. מֶלֶך – king, head of theocracy שַׂר 333 139i – military leader, leader 2. זֶבַח – sacrifice (to Jehovah) ַ מַצֵּּבָה – statue or altar of other gods 3. אֵפוֹד – ephod (in the cult of Jehovah) The first member of each of these three antitheses represents a phenomenon that should be observed from the point of view of a true Israeli, and the second is an undesirable phenomenon. The word מַצֵּּבָה may ​​raise doubts because the Stade and Siegfried dictionary says that it is “heilige Stein, Opferstein 334 86s”, and then the connotation of condemnation does not sound clearly in this word. But Jahn 335 says that this is “jedes Denkmahl, insbesondere aber abgöttliche Denkmähler und Statuen 336 87s.” This interpretation of Kimchi 337 140i is confirmed, and we see that in the era of Hosea the teraphim already receive such magical illumination that they are the direct opposite of the objects of the cult of Jehovah. In other words, by this time the teraphim had become in complete and decisive antagonism with the altar of Jehovah. 8°. – The meaning of this passage from the prophet Zechariah is that the blessings of life are from the Lord and in His power, so that neither the teraphim nor the soothsayers can foresee what will happen later, and therefore their words are false and their visions are deceptive; therefore it is vain to believe their consolations. From here the main function of teraphim is clearly visible - to guess about the future, just as the same function is for predictors. From what is said: אָוֶן 338 141i הַתְּרָפִים דּבְּרוּּ־, i.e. “the teraphim speak speeches that have no meaning,” it is clear that the teraphim in this era gave predictions in words or, in any case, sounds. This becomes even clearer when we pay attention to the fact that they are contrasted with soothsayers who tell fortunes on the basis of a vision, so that the word דִּבְּרוּ 339 142i stands in its exact meaning. Subsequently, among the Sabaeans, this method of fortune telling with teraphim, namely, by listening to words heard in their presence, is indicated quite definitely. From the general tone of the prophet’s speech, it is undoubtedly heard that he condemns teraphim and their use. The general conclusion from all the passages examined is that, from the very beginning to the very end, the Jewish people had teraphim and that their cult became more and more dangerous. 340 The remaining conclusions will be drawn later, after attracting new data. § 6. Opinions of Talmudists about teraphim and the state of the cult of teraphim in the extra-biblical period We have cited and analyzed those parts of the Bible that talk about teraphim. But before giving a summary of these passages, we think it necessary to point out the opinions of the Talmudists on the same question. These opinions are important to us not as biblical exegesis, which is almost certainly incorrect, but as indications of what the teraphim became in later times - during the time of the authors quoted below. The fact is that the Talmudists transferred the information they had about the teraphim in their time to the biblical teraphim. As a result of such a happy methodological error, the Talmudists have preserved much that is important for us. It turns out that in connection with the data presented, we get a number of points by which we can get an idea of ​​the general course of the evolution of the teraphim and thereby find out what the teraphim were like in the early period. Of course, such extrapolation in general is a risky business, especially if it wants to extend to some other order of being, different in relation to what is subsumed under the law, that is, the one for which we have already grasped the law, the formula of development. However, in this case, extrapolation can be carried out with significant probability, since we do not go beyond the boundaries of the process under study and do not approach the very beginning of it, where we can expect some unforeseen features. So here are these opinions: 341 342 143i 1°. – Abhoda Sara, cap. 2, in Mischna 343 144i: "Qui peregrinatur ad idola (לתרפות), prohibitum est habere commercia vel mercari cum eis 344 88s." 2°. - In the chapters of Rabbi Eliesar, 345 145i of the most ancient writer, where the story of Laban is told (Sarah 36), the following is read about these teraphim: “Quid sunt Theraphim? Mactabant hominem primogenitum et avellebant caput ejus, et saliebant illud sale et oleo, scribebantque super laminam auream nomen spiritus cujusdam immundi (i.e., the unclean spirit P.F. >) et ponebant illam sub lingua ejus. Postea posuerunt illud caput ad parietem (on the wall of P.F. >), et incedebant lampadas coram eo, ac procubuerunt coram ipso, et sic locutum est simulacrum illud cum eis. Unde autem prolatur, quod Theraphim locuta sunt? inde quod dicitur: “Theraphim loquuntur vanitatem” (Zach. 10, 2). Propterea furata est eas Rachel, ne indicarent Labano fugisse Jacobum 346 89s ". 3°. – Paraphrastus Jonathan (Jonathan paraphrastus) 347 146i speaks about Gen. 31:19 : “Et Laban iverat ad tonendum oves, interea furata fuit Rachel imaginas. Nam fuerunt mactantes virum primogenitum, cujus avellebant caput, et saliebant sale et aromatibus, scribebantque divinationes in laminam auream, quam posuerunt sub lingua ejus, et erigebant ad parietem et tunc loquebatur cum eis. Hae fuerunt (imagines) istae, coram quibus procubuerat pater ejus 348 90s." 4°. – Rabbi Salomon 349 147i in interpretations at 2 Rg. 23, 24 350 148i says: “Theraphim fuerunt imagines, quas loquebantur per artes magicas. Qui faciebat eas, opus habebat respicere horam certam et annum certum, convenientem ad id 351 91s.” In the interpretation of Ezek. 21. 21: “Theraphim est imago loquens per artem magicam, est que hora certa disposita, qua si confecerit eam, est in sermo perpetuus 352 92s.” In the interpretation on Os. 3, 4: "Theraphim sunt imagines factae certa intentione horae alicujus ad id dispositae, et sic loquuntur ex seipsis et annunciant occulta 353 93s." Therefore, Jonathan translated this passage as follows: “Et non est Ephod, neque indicans, scilicet futura vel occulta 354 94s.” 5°. – Rabbi David 355 149i in a comment on 1Sam. 19, 13 writes: “Theraphim quidam interpretes volunt esse idola, sicut fuerunt Theraphim Labanis, quae furata fuit Rachel. Laban fuit idolatra, juxta id quod dixit ad eam: Quare furata es deos meos? absit, absit, quod fuerit in domo Davidis idolum. Quidam dicunt fuisse instrumentum aereum, eo factum, ut viderentur in eo partes horarum, simul etiam futura beneficio astrorum. Id possit convenire negotio Labanis, sed in negotio Micholis grave est explicare, quare posuerit ea in lecto, in loco Davidis, cum istud instrumentum plane non fuerit ad hanc dispositionem accomodatum 356 95s.” In the interpretation of 2 Kings. 23, 24: “Theraphim sunt imagines ad cognoscendum ex eis futura 357 96s.” 6°. – Wise R. Abraham Aben Esra, in the commentary on the 31st chapter. Genesis, notes: “Quidam dicunt Theraphim fuisse instrumentum aereum ut cognoscerentur partes horarum. Alii dicunt, esse virtutem in peritis astrorum, facere imaginem horis notis, ut loquatur ista imago. Testis ipsis est locutus istë “Nam Theraphim loquuntur vanitatem” (Zach. 10, 2). At sensus istius localis non est. Verisimile apud me est, Theraphim habuisse formam humanam, ita factam, ut recipere posset virtutem superiorum; quod tamen ego explicare nequeo. Cujus rei testimonium est quod Theraphim, quae posuit Michol filia Saulis in lecto, tales fuerint ut putarint custodes domus, ea fuisse ipsum Davidem. Versus autem iste, qui ait "Non erit Ephod neque Theraphim" (Hos. 3, 4) duas habet interpretationes. Prima est, quod dicit: Non erit rex vel princeps in Israel, Nam Deus non elegit regem nisi ex familia Davidis, idcirco dicit in versu sequentï “Et quaerent Dominum Deum suum, et David regem suum.” Sequitur in Hoseä "Non erit sacrificium vel statua", scilicet ad idolatriam, "Neque erit Ephod" nempe quia cultores Bahal faciebant ephod simile ephodo Mosis id circo dicit אפוד , et non האפוד , ut ibi האפוד הגישה (1Sam. 23:9). Et, אפוד Ephod inciderat in manum ejus, ibidem vers. 7 non est intelligendum de Ephod, quod fecerat Moses, ut suo loco explicabo rationibus firmissimis, si placuerit Deo. Interpretatio secunda est, quod cultori non essent Deum, neque idola. Laban autem vocavit Theraphim אלוהיו Deos suos. Quidam dicunt Rachelem furatam fuisse ea, ut aboleret (release) idola a patre suo. Quod si est, quare abduxit ea secum, et non potius occultavit ea in via? Verisimile est, Labanum patrem ejus fuisse peritum astrorum, eam que veritam, ne pater inspiceret astra, cognosceretque quonam fugerint 358 97s." 7°. – Rabbi Levi ben Gersom 359 150i in the commentary on the book. Genesis says almost the same: “Theraphim sunt imagines forma humana, ut videre est in Michole filia Saulis, fuitque ista forma facta horis certis notis apud ipsos, qua excitaretur facultas imaginatrix divinantis, audiretque quasi vocem submissam loquentem ad se de rebus futuris, quibus accupata fuit cogitatio ejus, non autem quod ista figura seu imago loquitur, quod fuit impossibile, cum sermo non possit fieri nisi per organa, quae Deus in natura posuit 360 98s." 8°. – He writes similarly in the interpretation of the book. Genesis 31, 19 Rabbi Moses ben Majemon 361 151i . 9°. – Rabbi Bechai in the interpretation of the book. Genesis adds the opinion of Ramban, i.e. Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, saying: “Sententia Ramban de Theraphim est, quod fuerint instrumenta ad cognoscendum horas et utebantur eo ad divinationem ut scirent futura 362 99s.” 10°. – In the book Zohar 363 152i (In Gen. col. 376) it reads: “Quid fuerunt Theraphim? idolum fuerunt. Quare autem nominatum fuit תרפים ? Propter ignominiam, juxta (similar to P.F. >) id ubi dicimus במקום התרף, id est in loco turpitudinis, pudoris aut ignominiae 364 100s." 11°. – “Dixit autem R. Jehuda, Theraphim non fuerunt facta nisi horis certis et notis. Quare autem dicuntur Theraphim? quia deprimunt et remissas faciunt manus hominum, juxta id quod dicitur: Et nunc הֶרֶף remitte manum tuum 365 101s (2Sam. 24, 16) 366 153i." 12°. – In Tanchuma 367 154i in the department ויצא: “Quare vocantur Theraphim? propterea quod sunt opus turpitudinis et opus foeditatis 368 102s", that is, the etymology of 10° is confirmed here, and 13°.– Rabbi Bechai 369 155i inclines to the etymology of 11°, saying: “Vocabulum תְּרָפִים deductum est a locutione נִרְפִּים (id est a Radice רָפָה , Laxum Remissum esse) et vocat ea תְּרָפִים quasi רָָפִים (Laxa, remissa, infirma) ad indicandum, quod verba ipsorum sunt quasi רָפָה נְבוּּאָה , prophetia laxa, inanis et vana 370 103s". 14°. – The opinion of Rabbi David Kimchius has already been given (see § 5, 7°). § 7. News of ancient writers about slandering heads and about some types of blood cults We can illuminate the cult of the teraphim much more clearly if we understand the evidence of antiquity and the Middle Ages regarding talking heads and the bloody cult associated with them, because there is no doubt that they, at least among the Sabians, were the last link in the development of the teraphim and, as such, most clearly revealed their evil essence. As for similar cults among other peoples, we hesitate to say that the talking heads were borrowed from the cult of the teraphim; no, rather they appeared independently, as a result of a similar process in a broken religious consciousness, and therefore represent so many similar features. The human spirit is subject to the same laws, and therefore it is clear that walking in their own ways (Acts 14:16) leads to the same results. 1°. – In the 10th chapter of the 1st book and in some other places of the “Cosmography” of the Arab writer Shems-ed-Dîn Mohammed Ibn Abû-Thâleb Dimeschqî, it is said about the churches of the Sabians (der Ssabier) and their sacrifices made at certain times. Dimeschqî, according to the chronicle, Hasan ben Omr, was born in Damascus in 664 (1265), was a Sufi (Ssûfî) and held the position of imam (Imâm) in the village of Rabuvah near Damascus. He died in the city of Sefed in 727 (1327). 371 Before presenting his testimony about the Sabians, let us make a few remarks regarding this term. First of all, Sabians should not be confused with Sabians. Prof. Khvolson 372 156i divides the Sabians into 1) historical ones, which include true or Chaldean Sabians - Parsified Chaldean pagans or all - Christian Gnostics, the ancestors of the Mandaeans; they live near the Persian Gulf; 2) pseudosabians or Syrian Sabians - the remnants of ancient Syrian pagans of Greek culture; they lived in northern Mesopotamia and professed a religion that was a mixture of Chaldeism, Parsism, Judaism, Christianity, Gnosticism, Neoplatonism; from the 12th century no longer found in history. The second group of Sabians are the imaginary Sabians. So, this is what Dimeschqî 373 tells about bloody sorceries, very reminiscent of what some rabbis call teraphim: The church of Mars also belongs to the churches of the Sabians. It has a quadrangular shape and is entirely painted red, and its curtains are also red. Various weapons hang in the church, and in the middle of it there is a seat on seven steps, on which is an iron image. The idol holds a sword in one hand and the head by the hair in the other; the former, like the latter, are smeared with blood. On Tuesday, if Mars has reached the point of its culmination, they come to the church of Mars, dressed in red, smeared with blood and with dagger-shaped knives and drawn swords in their hands. They carry with them a red-headed, red-brown and red-cheeked man, whose head shines with intense redness, and place him in a pool filled with oil and medicine, where his flesh and skin quickly turn into decay (Verwesung). They secure it on stakes inside this pool, so that it remains immersed in oil for a whole year. 374 If disintegration (Auflösung) then followed, then they take the head of this sacred body and dissect (lostrennen) it from the head with its nerves, veins and opening for the passage of the aorta (Pforten). They stand with this head in front of the iron idol and say a prayer, the meaning of which is as follows: “O you evil, fickle, harsh, fiery Lord! You love rebellion (Anfruhr), murder, destruction, burning and bloodshed. We offer you a sacrifice that is like you; accept it from us graciously and turn away your evil (Hebel) and your spirit from us.” They believe that this head predicts for 7 years the good and evil that will happen to them in the year. In the city of Ssûr'e (Tyre) there is also a church of Mars on the shore; and the Sabians claim that Jerusalem was built before Solomon - may there be peace upon it! - and that there was a church of Mars, in which there was an image whose name was Tammûz. 2°. – Another story of the same kind is reported by En-Nedîm. Ibn enNedîm el Bagdâdî-el Kâtib (secretary), called Abûlfarag Ibn Abû Ja‘qûb elWarrâq (bookseller), wrote Fihrist-el-’Ulûm, 375 in which the 1st part of the 1st book is dedicated to the Sabians. We give from it a translation (from German) of part of the 3rd chapter, entitled “Message about the head.” 376 This writer en-Nedîm was born in 377 (987) and died in ... 377 157i 157. Here's what he says: The above-mentioned man (Jûsuf ben Abschaa) says: this head is of a man whose appearance corresponds to the appearance of Mercury, as they imagine it among the images (Gestalten) of the other planets. As soon as a person is found of the species that they consider mercurial, they capture him by cunning and a sudden attack and then do various things with him. So, for example, he is kept in oil and borax until his joints are relaxed and he comes to such a state that the head - without, as I think, the person being killed in advance - (from the body) is separated if only it is pulled. Hence it happens that about someone who is in anguish it is said: “he sits in oil” - an old saying. They do this annually at the time when Mercury reaches its culmination point. They think that the soul of this person descends from time to time to this head, speaks in its language, foretells the future and answers questions addressed to it, for they believe that the nature of man is more consistent and similar to the nature of Mercury than the nature of other living beings; (they believe) further that man, due to language and the power of judgment, stands closer (than those) to Mercury and other things that they trust in this regard. Their veneration of this head, their treatment of it and what they do with it before and after its separation from the body, finally, the use that they also give to some parts of this body after they have taken the head from it - all this forms a long series of things that appear in a certain book of theirs, called “the book of elHâtifî”... etc. (about this book). As Prof. notes. Khvolson, 378 here it is impossible not to note some contradiction between the story of en-Nedîm’a and Dimeschqî. According to the latter, the human sacrifice, from which the head was taken for predictions, was offered to Mars, while the sacrifice to Mercury, as we learn from § 7 of the same work Dimeschqî (Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. 394–396) was burned after quartering. A en-Nedîm refers the same sacrifice (which Dimeschqî refers to Mars) not to Mars, but to Mercury. This contradiction, however, is quite understandable, since, firstly, about 300 years passed between these two writers, so the ritual could have changed greatly, and since, secondly, the Sabian deities can hardly be considered completely consistent with the gods of the Greco-Roman pantheon and therefore, when translating their names into Greco-Roman names, significant arbitrariness and confusion are possible. 3°.– From the same book en-Nedîm’a. 379 Av (August). On the 8th of this month they press new wine for the gods and give it different names. On this day, in the mid-afternoon, they sacrifice a newborn male child to the gods represented by statues (durch Standbilder). First the boy is killed, and then kneaded (gesotten) until he becomes completely soft, and then his flesh is taken and ground together with fine honey, saffron, lavender (Spikenard), cloves (Gewurznelken) and oil (another way of reading: raisins, Rosine), from which small loaves the size of a fig are made (or rolled, geknetet), and baked in a new (or iron) oven. They serve the participants in the sacraments of Schemâl (for food) for the whole year. But neither a woman, nor a slave, nor the son of a slave, nor a madman shall eat from them. Only 3 priests are allowed to kill and prepare this child. But all that remains of his veins, members, cartilage, arteries and nerves is burned by the priests as a sacrifice to the gods. The size of the essay does not allow us to give other examples of human sacrifices, which, according to Khvolson, are associated with talking heads; we refer to the above-mentioned work of Khvolson and, in particular, to his work placed in the 2nd volume on the river. 142–155 “An excursion about human sacrifices in the later times of paganism and about human heads that communicate predictions.” We will indicate only a few data from here. From the stories of Arab writers about the human sacrifices of the Sabians in Harran, the following general instructions follow: 380 1) that the Sabians generally offer human sacrifices; 2) that only famous people of a certain type and certain properties were chosen for such victims; 3) that children were often sacrificed; 4) that such sacrifices were made to each planet only once annually, at certain times; 5) that such sacrifices were associated with various mysterious rites; 6) that the Sabians finally had human heads, which gave them an oracle. Having cited many evidence of human sacrifices in the later times of paganism, Khvolson 381 conveys evidence of fortune telling based on these victims: Among the many methods of divination that Fabricius lists (bibliogr. antiqu. p. 416 ff.), there is also the following: “Anthropomantia ex visceribus humanis vel extis (heart, lungs, etc. P.F. >) puerorum aut virginum, vel gravidarum foeminarum 382 104s.” Fabricius relies on a wealth of evidence. From an even later time, about 70–80 years after Julian, Rufinus, in his continuation of the church history of Eusebius, tells that during the time of Caesar Theodosius, severed children's heads with gilded lips were found in the sanctuary (in dem Adytum P. F. >) of the church of Serapis (“Horret animus dicere, ...quae scelera in illis, quae dicebantur ἄδυτα, tegerentur: quot ibi infantium capita desecta inauratis labris inventa sint 383 105s ", II 24 384 158i). These children's heads could not be anything other than the heads of sacrificed children, etc. It remains 385 for us to further explain the statement that it was the Sabians who, in their churches, seem to have preserved the heads of the sacrificed people, and that these heads gave the oracle. In general, we find the oracle of the dead (Totenorakel) among the Thracians, Phoenicians, Greeks and even among the Germans. We have already given the story of Rufinus... Theodoret also tells (Hist. eccles. III 27 386 159i) that in the royal palace, in Antioch, boxes filled with human heads and wells full of corpses were found ... there is no doubt that these corpses - if they were actually found there - were from sacrificed people, whose heads were kept specially in boxes, perhaps for the same purpose for which they were taken in our story heads. We are also reminded of the head that every year, during the Adonii (festival in honor of Adonis), was supposed to arrive from Egypt - a head that Lucian claims he himself saw, but which was not of any person, but was made of papyrus bark (Papierstande). We are also reminded of the casket with Arcanis Chaldaeorum 387 106s, which the Roman soldiers took as booty under Marcus Antoninus in the church in Seleucia - a casket that was very carefully preserved and which, when opened, spread plague and disease with its fetid fumes from the Persian border to the Rhine and Gaul (Ammian. Marcell. XXIII 6, 23 388 160i). It is not incredible that this carefully guarded casket contained decayed parts of a human body, perhaps even only one such human head. Rabbinic writings even more often mention a type of spell using a human head to find out the future. In Mishnah 389 161i (Tract. Synhedrion 7, 10) it reads like this: “The exorcist through Ov is a python (פיתון is the Greek πύθων, in the later meaning of a ventriloquist...), who speaks into the hands (unterhalb der Arme 390 162i) 391 163i.” This is explained by Maimonides 392 164i in his commentary on Scripture 393 165i as follows: “They take the head of a man after his flesh has decayed, and carefully lift it up, then burn it incense before it and hear this head speak, according to the declaration of exorcists, as is heard from the dead through the art of the exorcist of the dead ( אוב ).” Maimonides, as a philosopher, notices in addition to this that in fact neither the head speaks nor man actually hears anything, but that everything happens only as a result of the power of imagination. In the Talmudic explanation of the above Mishnah, the Tosefta is given, 394 166i in which the various types of exorcism of the dead ( אוב, Ob) clearly include asking questions to the head of a dead person, which is placed in front of oneself. Maimonides gives us back in his Mischnah-Torah, in the article on idolatry 6, 1 395 167i the following explanation of אוב worthy of note. He says: “The caster lights a certain smoking composition, holds a myrtle branch in his hand, which he raises upward, and then speaks quietly certain words for so long until it seems to him that it is as if someone is speaking to him and answering his questions from underground and even in such a weak voice that it seems that he is perceived not by the ear, but simply by the power of the imagination. They also take the head of a dead man, in front of which they smoke certain substances and say certain formulas until they are sure that they perceive a very quiet voice that passes between the hands of the caster - and answers the questions posed ... " We believe that our Sabians... initially actually kept human heads from the dead for various theurgic purposes and for oracles, as was, in all likelihood, also the case in other pagan temples, but later they could simply have the heads of idols, which were made from some specific substance and also gave an oracle, which often happened in paganism. The history of the development of paganism presents us many times with such moments that ancient religious rites, which were no longer modern, were replaced by other similar, modern ones. So, for example, when time no longer tolerated human sacrifices, instead of sacrificing a person, they put him before the altar and then release him, or they bring a doe instead of a person, or, finally, they bring figures of wax or dough in the form of people. But about such heads, a rumor could spread among the Mohammedans, Christians and Jews that the pagans actually possess human heads. We base this guess of ours mainly on the following message from Damascius in Photius 396 168i (c. 242, p. 1045). Damascius, namely, says that Jerome, a student of Proclus, saw in the home of the famous Quirinus a human head the size of a pea (Erbse) - this, therefore, could not be any real human head, which was molded completely like a person, with hair, eyes and a mouth and emitted (ausstiessen) from itself screams (Laute), which were as strong as the cry of a thousand people... These small heads were, no doubt, a type of portable household idols (see: Jos. Antiq. 397 169i XVIII 9, 5) or puppets, the nodding of which to the right or left was considered as a response - puppets similar to the teraphim of the Bible. There is no shortage of examples giving oracles of idols. Lucian (de Dea Syr. 398 170i § 10) speaks of augury images in the church at Herapolis, the clear tones of which were often perceived in the church if it was locked. He also says the same thing (§ 36) in detail about the way in which the statue of Apollo gave oracles in the mentioned church. Servius mentions (Virg. Aen. 399 171i VI 68) also “Simulacra brevia quae portabantur in lecticis, et ab ipsis mota infundebant vaticinationem 400 107s.” Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 401 172i IX 3) tells of a statue of Jupiter, which spoke as a result of magical art: “Interea reperisse se occasionem maximam ratus est ex eo, quod apud Antiochiam simulacrum quoddam Jovis Amicalis nuper consecratum artibus quibusdam magicis et impuris consecrationibus ita compositum est, ut falleret oculos intuentium, et portenta quaeddam ostentare videretur ac responsa proferre. Idque omnibus et ipsis imperatoribus certo confirmatur... 402 108s ". We also recall the famous Baphomet of the Templars (der Templer) in the Middle Ages 403 173i, in which at least something true must lie at the base (cf. Fundgruben des Orients, VI, p. 3, die Abh. von Hammer) 404 174i and about which the story reported by Malmesburiensis reads as follows: “De Gereberto fama dispersit, fudisse sibi Statuae caput, certe inspectione siderum; cum videlicet omnes Planetas exordia cursus sui meditarentur, quod nonnisi interrogatum loqueretur, sed verum vel affirmative, vel negative pronunciaret verbi gratia, cum diceret Gerebertus: ero Apostolicus? respondere Statuä Etiam. Morior antiquam canem Missam in Jerusalem? Non 405 109s "(de Gestibus regum Angliae, II, c. X. by Selden'y, De Diis Syris Syntagma, 406 175i p. 285). These stories about such heads, which were so widespread in the Middle Ages, which, however, could not be anything other than a legacy of paganism - since such things are found many times among the ancients - sufficiently prove that such oracle-giving heads were an integral part in the structure of pagan temples. Such heads probably include valuable details of our speaker (en-Nedîm P.F. >) and they are probably similar to the teraphim mentioned in the Bible, which Rachel once stole in our Sabian city of Harran from her father Laban, who were still in the house of the monotheistic David and which we consider to be nothing more than a race of nodding puppets. 407 In explanation of all that has been said, some more data 408 about the Assyro-Babylonian religion can be cited. The gods and spirits of the Assyro-Babylonian pantheon proclaimed their will in various ways: through dreams, through their soothsayers - “sabra”, who were possessed by the spirit of god and through whose lips they spoke. But more often revelations were given by material objects; statues of gods especially served this purpose. “Since these statues were approached with questions according to established ritual formulas, they had to answer. Gudea's texts 409 176i speak about this. He erected his own statue in the church of Telloch 410 177i, and, in his opinion, it, inspired by the statue of the deity, was supposed to speak (it is interesting to compare this with the words of Ezekiel about the king of Babylon P.F. >). Kings had the right and custom to directly question the statues themselves. Usually at night they appeared in the sanctuary and asked questions, to which the statues answered them.” Just as some researchers connected the questioning of the teraphim with ventriloquism, so here, in the cult of Assyrian-Babylonian spirits, researchers see a connection with the same phenomenon. In addition, divinations were also obtained through asking for vague sounds emanating from meteorites, certain trees, and certain special types of weapons, and were interpreted by their priests. This is a public cult. But besides this, each family had its own family shrines, family gods. Prayers were offered to them in families, and libations were poured out before their images standing at the hearth. They, these household gods, protected the owner and his family against the machinations of evil spirits. It is hardly necessary to point out the numerous points of similarity between the fortune-telling described and the fortune-telling by the teraphim; the similarities are striking 411 6g. § 8. General view of the evolution of teraphim Much more can be said about teraphim and similar phenomena in different eras and among different peoples than has been said; you can increase the number of evidence, mark more individual points. However, the size of the essay does not allow this. But the material presented is enough to draw some important conclusions about the course of development of the teraphim, about where the Jews should have come when “walking their ways” (see: Acts 14:16) and from what God saved the mass of them, the people. We have seen that the most ancient evidence paints the teraphim in rather light colors; the teraphim here are more a simple thing than an object of cult, a thing that may need to be treated with reverence, but which hardly has any meaning more than an amulet or a talisman; The teraphim may have occult powers, but these are not magical powers. And it is most accurate to define them as tactile monuments, reminiscent of the connection between ancestors and descendants, and bearers of paternal power and paternal patronage. But, affirming the connection of the departed with the living, the original admirer of the teraphim does not yet make a note of what he actually honors: whether this connection is in its truth (the development of this moment would lead to the idea of ​​the Church) or in its simple facticity, regardless of the truth, and then in spite of the truth (the development of which leads to the creation of ideas about larvas, ghouls, etc.). Due to such uncertainty, the original teraphim eludes its assessment from the point of view of religious consciousness. If it is not something required by this consciousness, then it is not absolutely excluded by it. But for a religious worldview, which by its very essence wants to define and distribute everything, for a religious worldview such an object, invaluable and indifferent, cannot exist. If, apparently, the object is like this, then it seems so because its essence has not yet been revealed; he must reveal it sooner or later, become in a certain relation to the religious principle and turn out to be either illegal and improper from the point of view of religious consciousness, and therefore condemned, or, conversely, proper and legal, and therefore approved. For a consistently developing religious consciousness, the realm of phenomena that are indifferent and elude evaluation melts and diminishes, because it uncontrollably and spontaneously breaks down into what should and should not, pure and impure, into cult and magic. And the putrefactive germ of this latter, no matter how weak and unnoticeable it may have been from the beginning, was contained in the teraphim; These flowers of natural life, innocent in appearance, but already undermined by the worm of impurity, from the very beginning carried within themselves the potency of the future. The germ of magism develops uncontrollably and relentlessly; horror spontaneously grows, the dark force grows closer and deeper into the teraphim. Accordingly, the calm narration of the holy book gives way to reproach; the reproach turns into reproaches. But we must either weed out the teraphim altogether, uproot everything infected with magic, or... watch as a passive spectator as the buds of the future “flowers of evil” bloom, as the cloud around the teraphim thickens and darkens with ominous slowness. Either one or the other: tertium non datur 412 110s. The teraphim were not uprooted, and the heads of the dark forces that had taken refuge in them rose higher and higher. Ominous fears spread like silent ghosts around these centers. The shadows fluttered and thickened. The unclean army approached more and more elementally, the slimy gray tentacles - the disgusting hands of the octopus - stretched out more and more shamelessly, until they finally threw off their masks - the masks of the old teraphim and broke out from under the shell of the household god in their own disgusting and terrifying form, until they brought into the light dark, absurd and distorting sorcery and the unbearable, driving even descriptions, almost to the point of nausea, of the cult of the Sabians. Behind the dead were the dead, behind the Larams were the Larvas. If the rabbis, shocked by this spectacle and losing their heads, mixed up ends and beginnings and spoke in the spirit of contemporary phenomena about the teraphim of the good old days, then this does not in the least detract from the value of their testimony; we do not care that they incorrectly established historical perspectives and projected what was close to them into the distant, what the teraphim became, what they were originally. The rabbis are essentially right, because, having recognized the teraphim “by their fruits,” they were able to look into their beginning, into their root, and saw there at the bottom that dark embryo that blossomed so magnificently and poisonously before their eyes. The rabbis call the teraphim shameful names תועבה 413 178i, שקוץ, etc. But, no matter how expressive these words are, no matter how inimitably the reptile sounds of the word שקוץ brand the abomination and depth of the internal absurdity of these teraphim - monstrous creatures of dark forces - this still not enough. The soul shudders, life freezes, a deep melancholy takes over - the melancholy of “outer darkness” - when you learn about the details of the cult. It is impossible to calmly read descriptions of him, it is impossible without a shudder of disgust and horror for the damage of man, for the depth of his fall, for his remoteness - his distance from the Pure………………… [as in the manuscript. – Ed. ] And the words of the psalm: “Out of the depths I cried to Thee, O Lord...” - are involuntarily interrupted by the description of the Book of Wisdom: “and over them alone was spread the heavy night, the image of the darkness that once had time to embrace them; but for themselves they were more burdensome than darkness” (Wis. 17:20). And so, when with such certainty the development of the teraphim is outlined from the point of indifference towards a movement away from God, opposite God, when with such clarity one can see the desire of the teraphim to become an instrument of magic, that is, an anti-religious instrument, unconditionally excluded by religious consciousness, when the undoubted desire of the teraphim towards antitheism becomes so clear, then the desire to derive monotheism from the cult of the teraphim becomes completely incomprehensible. A trick is needed in order to be able to replace the movement from God, which as a result is assumed to be behind the terminus a quo, given as such, with a movement towards God. But here, however, is what Ewald says, 414 outlining his hypothesis about the type of teraphim (see § 5, p. 84): Solchergestalt etwa waren die, wie man nicht zweifeln kann, uralten hausgötter des volkes: und bei der ungemeinen zähigkeit (with extreme survivability. – P.F. >) womit sich alles häusliche troz der entgegengesezten grundsäze des Jahvethumes wenig verändert erhielt, ist es nicht auffalend (not surprising .– P.F. >) daß viele noch jahrhunderte lang von diesen hausgöttern schuz (defense .– P.F. >) und orakel suchten; nur daß man jezt Jahve’n selbst in dem bilde fand. Von einzelnen häusern ging diese vergröberung des Jahvethumes dann wohlauch auf etwas weitere kreise über, wie ein enkel Mose’s am äußersten nordsaume (northern border .– P.F. >) des landes in Dân mit seinen nachkommen das priesterthum eines solchen Jahvethumes übernahm. Allein das dieser mißbrauch je am mittelorte des reiches selbst eingerissen sei ist gegen allen augenschein; und sobald mit Samûel eine kräftigere ernenerung der ächten religion herrschend wurde, konnte ein solcher mißbrauch wenigstens öffentlich sich nicht erhalten, wie über jenes Dân bestimmt gemeldet wird (definitely reported. – P.F. >). In einzelnen häusern aber erhielt sich die achtung der Terafîm noch viel länger. 415 111s If you like, you can perhaps say that the teraphim created monotheism, namely, to say in the sense that the more and more determined unclean essence of the teraphim made them feel more clearly and vividly the power and holiness of the Pure One, but for those who already knew Him. If you like, you can say that the development of magic creates religion, namely, to say in the sense that evil that is not fully defined is still difficult to appreciate, while evil brought to its final limits, evil without a mask, screams about itself; here everyone can figure out what’s going on, and then feel with special clarity the clarity of the Clear. But to say all this without qualification is to play with words; If we express Ewald’s hypothesis, then this means playing with facts, or rather, inventing a course of phenomena that is the opposite of what actually happened. § 9. Some opinions about teraphim Now that the course of development of the teraphim has been indicated, when there are more or less coherent general ideas about their evolution, and not just isolated indications and hints, we can more firmly grasp what the teraphim of the most ancient eras, the teraphim of Laban, actually were. At the same time, we will give some additional information about what opinions were expressed about the teraphim. 1°. – We will begin by citing Ferrière’s opinion for the sake of completeness, 416 according to which teraphim are identical to “avec des idoles catholiques,” i.e., plaster, wooden, faience, etc. statues and figurines of the Virgin and Saints, placed at crossroads, in shrines, etc. 2°. – Then you can cite the opinion of Prof. Khvolson, - a summary of his research on teraphim: 417 A whole series of considerations (given by Khvolson) “make it probable for me,” he says, “that the teraphim are nothing more than a kind of puppet figures (eine Art von Marionettenfigürchen), like the ἀγάλματα, νευρόσπατα of the Greeks - a kind of puppets that twitched with strings (Saite - vein, string P.F. >) or threads and were set in motion (Herodot. 418 179i II 48 and Lucian, de Dea Syr. § 16), the movements of which were considered as indications of the future (cf. Subsilles and Ipsullices in Festus 419 180i, p 245 and 539 and Lobeck, Agl 420 181i, p. 227 f.); that further they, initially at least, had nothing to do with the service of idols and that only the later rigoristic Judaism condemned them, for they were already statues, which it abhorred in every respect. These initially so innocent figures could later be used by the pagan priesthood, wrapped in a halo of solemn, mysterious ceremonies, and this continued until they became an integral part of the pagan cult, because of which, in turn, those (famous) rumors about human heads arose in later times among Christians, Jews and Mohammedans. However, Scholz 421 > considers Khvolson's opinion incredible, since the passages he quoted from Herodotus and Lucian, which are of great importance for Khvolson, refer to the φαλλός 'am of Dionysus, which have nothing to do with the teraphim; in the same way, Scholz considers Khvolson’s opinion that they were originally innocent figures to be unfair: in his opinion, they were always condemned by orthodox Jews. However, even if Scholz is right, then the fact indicated by Khvolson is undeniable, namely that the condemnation of the teraphim increases over time. 3°. – Referring to the piety and holiness of Jacob, Jurieu 422 argues that Rachel could not keep the tools of magic with her. Therefore, he believes that originally the teraphim were not instruments of magic, but were simply revered images, but not images of deorum naturalium 423 112s, like Moloch, Astarte, etc., for the latter were always represented as mixed and emblematic figures, and not images of some people who were initiated into gods. Thus, says Jurieu, these were the "household gods", the patron gods (Dieux Tutélaires) of the house, corresponding to the Latin Lares, Lares. This family significance of the teraphim is also indicated by the words of Laban: “Why did you steal my gods,” and not “our gods.” To prove the similarity of the Roman Lares and the Teraphim of the eastern peoples, Jurieu establishes a number of parallels between the two. Without dwelling on them in detail, we note that the Laras had the main function of maintaining the well-being of the family, that they were “des âmes consacrées & canonisées 424 113s” - the souls of ancestors, depicted in the form of human figures. All this, says Jurieu, leads to the recognition that Laban's teraphim are images of Laban's most glorious ancestors. Continuing to further develop his thought, he makes a rather fantastic assumption that Laban’s teraphim were images of Noah and Shem: Noah, because he is the common father of all, and Shem, because he is the ancestor of Laban’s family. In accordance with these two teraphim, Jurieu also puts the fact that the Romans for a long time (before Ovid) had only two Lares in Lararium. According to the same researcher, Holy Scripture, speaking about all kinds of sorcery and generally mentioning the teraphim, seems to forget about questioning the dead, and vice versa, mentioning this questioning, as if forgetting the teraphim. This is because, explains Jurieu wittily, asking the teraphim and asking the dead are one and the same thing. The oracle of the teraphim itself is compiled as follows. The Eastern peoples had in a remote part of their home relics of their ancestors; but since, as the family grew, these relics were not enough for everyone, they began to build cenotaphs, κενοτάφια, empty graves - from turf, wood or stone. At the two ends of these cenotaphs they erected these teraphim - images of their ancestors, just as the cherubim stood over the Ark of the Covenant. Now, as a result of this custom of putting teraphim on cenotaphs, the word teraphim in the LXX is transmitted through κενοτάφια. The question is, how exactly did the teraphim give the required oracle? We have already pointed out the remarkable opinion of Maimonides (§ 7, p. 124), who asserts that these were sounds perceived not by the organ of hearing, but internally. Maimonides, apparently, draws a conclusion from this to their illusory nature; however, according to modern research in psychology (for example, Meyers and others), such an audition interior 425 114s undoubtedly exists. This not only “appears,” that is, it is not something that depends only on the hearing subject, but it is also conditioned by some actual perception, which is then projected in the form of auditory sensations. But, be that as it may, from the outside, in the sense of physical processes, Maimonides’ interpretation is very probable. Bellarmin 426 182i holds the same opinion (De ecсls. triumphante, Cap. 13, gec. quart. mendatium). In the words of Jurieu, 427 "Il veut que les statuës, appelées Theraphims, parlassent & rendissent leurs rèponces, par une voix intelligible, qui sortoit des statuës 428." We cannot decide definitively whether this opinion about the method of fortune telling with teraphim is correct, and therefore we have no choice but to point out the significant probability of such an opinion and list those methods of obtaining an oracle that existed in paganism. Here they are: 1. sometimes they guessed by the priest’s voice; 3. by the voice coming out of the caves; 6. in writing, receiving answers on locked tablets (cf. the spiritualistic studies of Zöllnera, very similar to what was said). In addition to the Jurieu hypothesis, we can, by the way, say that it is also confirmed by archaeological data: Weser and Dwisberg near Medava found metal figurines in the appearance of a man; they “turned out to be teraphim”(?). 429 On the other hand, one of these figures has a spike on its legs, with which, apparently, the figure was attached to something (cenotaph?) in a standing position. 430 § 10. Conclusion: History of idols according to the Book of Wisdom The development of the teraphim indicated in § 8 agrees well with the explanation given by the Book of the Wisdom of Solomon (chapter 14) of the origin of idolatry in general: “They (idols) were not in the beginning, says Wisdom, and they will not be forever (13). They entered the world out of human vanity, and therefore their end is imminent (14). The father, tormented by bitter grief over his early deceased son, made an image of him as an already dead man, then began to honor him as a god, and passed on the secrets and sacrifices to his subjects (15). Then, established by time, this wicked custom was observed as a law, and according to the orders of the rulers, the statue was revered as a deity (16), etc.” Similarly, Philaret says that the teraphim represented some famous ancestors: “from monuments of love,” he says, “they little by little turned into objects of reverence and first became household deities.” The Book of Wisdom also talks about the method of preparing household idols (probably teraphim). This is the passage from Chapter 13: “Some treemaker, having cut down a useful tree, skillfully removed all the bark from it and, having dressed it beautifully, made it into a vessel useful for use in life (11), and used the trimmings from the work for cooking and was satisfied (12); he took one of the scraps, useless for anything, a crooked and knotty tree, carefully rounded it at his leisure and, with the experience of an expert, made it like a human model (13), or made it similar to some low animal, smeared it with red lead and covered its surface with paint, and painted over every flaw in it (14), and, having arranged for it a place worthy of it, hung it it on the wall, strengthened with iron (15). So, so that his work would not fall, he took care in advance, knowing that it could not help itself, for it was an idol and needed help (17).” Next, the individual functions of such “idols” are defined, and they are very similar to what was indicated in § 1 regarding teraphim when analyzing the root רָפָה. “Praying before him,” says the Book of Wisdom, “about his acquisitions, about marriage and about children, he is not ashamed to speak to the soulless (17) and he calls for health to the weak, for life the dead asks for help, for help for the completely incapable, for a journey - the one who cannot walk (18), for profit, about craft and about the success of the hands - what cannot do with his hands at all, the most powerless asks for strength (19).” The manuscript is an A5 notebook (18x22 cm), sewn from five lined notebooks (the 1st contains 14 sheets, the rest - 16 each), with a larger format cover (19x26 cm) made of blue cardboard and a glued title page of unlined paper. The text is written in black ink. The paragraph titles are underlined in red pencil, the “lengthy” version of the title of the work before the bibliography and before the main text is underlined in ink and red pencil. The underlining in the text is done in ink. Page numbers are in the upper outer corners. There are 4.5 cm wide margins on all pages on the outside. The handwriting in which the review was written and the handwriting of the notes in the margins are somewhat different, which may be explained by the fact that the review was of an “official” nature, and the notes in the margins were of a “working” nature. In addition, the review is written in pen and ink, and the notes are written in crayon. The abundance of factual errors deprives the author’s reasoning of almost any meaning, set out, for example, in § 1 under number II (see publisher’s notes 8, 9 and 14, from which it is clear that the author was completely unfamiliar with the ancient language, the vocabulary of which he is discussing, and was not dealing with the sources he refers to, but only with the opinion about them in the literature available to him) and III (see publisher’s note 25, from which we can conclude that the author poorly understood the material available to him, namely the German text of Ewald’s book). For example, without any reservations, the opinions of Athanasius Kircher (1601–1680), on the one hand, and Franz Maurer (1795–1874) with Heinrich Ewald (1803–1875), on the other, are compared; Another example is the statement “Hitzig and Michaelis, then Lengerke” looks strange if we take into account their years of life, respectively: 1807–1875, 1717–1791 and 1803–1855. Like, for example, the idea of ​​Jacques Gaffarel (1601–1681) about the connection between the words “seraphim” and “teraphim” (see note 47). Archim. Joseph was at that time an extraordinary professor at the Moscow Academy of Sciences and a Master of Theology, awarded this degree for his dissertation “History of the Jewish People according to the Archeology of Josephus (An Experience of Critical Analysis and Processing)” ([Sergiev Posad:] Own Printing House of the Holy Trinity Sergius Lavra, 1903), who lectured at the Department of Biblical History (see: Joseph (Petrovykh), Metropolitan Samuel and Saul in their mutual relations: Trial lecture on the department of biblical history // BV 1900. T. 3. No. 12. pp. 561–584). 1i Karl Adolf Siegfried (Karl (Carl) Gustav Adolf Siegfried; 01/22/1830, Magdeburg - 01/09/1903, Jena) - German Protestant theologian and Orientalist, ordinary professor of the Old Testament at the theological faculty of the University of Jena in 1875–1901. 2i Bernhard Wilhelm Stade (05/11/1848, Arnstadt - 12/6/1882, Giessen) - German Protestant theologian and Orientalist, ordinary professor at the University of Giessen (since 1875), founder of the magazine Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (1881). 1s A word with vague etymology and meaning (German). Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 866. Gesenius. Thesaurus. Bd. 3/1. P. 1519–1520. 3i Wilhelm Gesenius (02/3/1786, Nordhausen - 10/23/1842, Halle) - German Protestant theologian and Orientalist, ordinary professor of the Old Testament at the theological faculty of the University of Halle since 1811; an outstanding researcher of the Hebrew language, lexicographer and grammarian. 2s These are the most preferred statements about this subject by the latest scientists, I omit others - as inaccurate and erroneous. For my part, I do not accept any of these proposals, but I have nothing more reliable at my disposal that would help resolve this extremely complex issue. But if we are to express our point of view in this case, then the most probable hypothesis seems to us, which we gave second (lat.). Gesenius. Grammar. pp. 331–339 (§§ 87, 88). 3s Plural (German). 4s Plural of greatness (German). Schenkel. Bibellexikon. S. 499. 5s Spatial extent (lat.). 6s Abstract concept (lat.). 4i In the manuscript (hereinafter in similar cases) it is incorrect - נִעוּרִים . 7s Youth, youth (lat.). 5i In the manuscript – רַה ֽ ֲמִים . 11s Internal plurality (i.e., a sublime concept in the form of “multiple greatness”) (lat.). 6i In the manuscript – הִים ל אֶ . Zapletal. Grammatica. P. 35 (§ 26). 7i In the manuscript – אֵלהִים . 8i The Syriac word tārep or torep is a verbal form (present or active participle) of the 1st species from the root trp with the basic meaning "plunging", "immersed". The opinion that this form can have the meaning “questioning”, “asks”, noted in the Bar-Bahlule dictionary (10th century) and there criticized as “a meaningless and harmful opinion” (qawlun bāṭilun munkarun; see: Duval R., ed. Lexicon syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule. P., 1888–1896. T. 2. Col. 2090; Payne Smith R. Thesaurus Syriacus. Oxf., 1879. T. 2. Col. 4507), is not taken into account in later scientific lexicography of the Syriac language. Filaret. Notes. P. 84. Palmov. Idolatry. C. 185. 9i More precisely, it does not occur in Aramaic at all. Jahn. Archäologie. S. 506. 10i Bar Bahlul (Sir. Bar Bahlul, Arabic: Ḥasan ˀibn ˀal-Bahlūl, ˀAbu-l-Ḥasan ˀibn ˀal-Bahlūl; 10th century) – Syrian lexicographer. 11i Edmund Castell (1606–1685) – British Orientalist, lexicographer, professor of Arabic at the University of Cambridge. 12i Lexicon heptaglotton, hebraicum, chaldaicum, syriacum, samaritanum, aethiopicum, arabicum conjunctim; et persicum separatim... 1669. Graz, 1970 r. Schenkel. Bibellexikon. S. 494. 13i Duval R., ed. Lexicon syriacum auctore Hassano bar Bahlule. P., 1901. 1970.T. 2. Col. 2090. Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 1519–1520. 12 Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 1519–1520. 14i In the Bar-Bahlul dictionary, in the article on tārep, the interpretation of this word as “seeks out”, “asks” is indeed rejected, but teraphim are not mentioned (see note 8i). 15i Comments r. Tanhum of Jerusalem (Tanḥum ben Joseph ha-Yerushalmi; c. 1220–1291), medieval Jewish philosopher, philologist and exegete, on the books of Judges and 1 Samuel (1 Samuel according to Sin. Trans.); ed.: R. Tanchum Hierosolymitani ad libros V[eteris] T[estamenti] Commentarii arabici specimen, una cum annotationibus ad aliquot loca Libri Iudicum / Ed. C. F. Schnurrer, E. C. Ziling. Tubingen, 1791; R. Tanchumi Hierosolymitani commentarium arabicum ad librorum Samuelis et Regum locos graviores e codice unico Oxoniensi (Pocock. 314) secundum Schnurreri apographum / Ed. Th. Haarbrücker. Lpz., 1844; R. Tanchumi Hierosolymitani commentarii in prophetas arabici specimen / Ed. Th. Haarbrücker. Halle, 1842. T. 1. Erlangen, 1844. T. 2. 16i Commentary on the book of the prophet Hosea by the English theologian and Orientalist Edward Pocock (1604–1691), professor of Arabic and Hebrew at Oxford University, collector of Oriental manuscripts; ed.: Pocock E. A Commentary on the Prophecy of Hosea. Oxf., 1685. 14s About false gods (lat.). Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 1519–1520; Palmov. Idolatry. 17i For example: “...and he will cease the daily sacrifice, and will set up the abomination ( שִׁקּוּּץ ) of desolation” (Dan. 11:31); “They provoked Him to anger with strange gods and angered Him with abominations” (Deut. 32:16). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2659. 18i Johann Buxtorf the Elder (1564–1629) – Swiss theologian and Hebraist, professor of Hebrew at the University of Basel, expert and collector of rabbinic literature. Used in this essay Fr. Pavel Florensky's dictionary of Johann Buxtorf the Elder “Lexicon Chaldaicum, Talmudicum et Rabbinicum” was published after the death of the author by his son, Johann Buxtorf the Younger. 15s Obscenity, disgrace, disgrace, dishonor (lat.). 19i The word order in the manuscript is incorrect: התורף במקום . 16s In the treatise “Zohar” in the interpretation of the book of Genesis (Col. 376) it is said: “R. Joseph said: "Who were the Teraphim? They are idols. Why were they called תרפים ? Because of dishonor - just as we say במקום התורף , that is, in the meaning of “obscenity” or “shame” or “disgrace.” In the midrash of Tanchuma in the section “Vayeze” this etymology is confirmed with these words: “Why are they called Teraphim? Because they are obscene and ugly things” (Latin). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2663. 20i Elias Germanus, Elija Bahur, Elija ben Asher ha-Levi Ashkenazi; 1468/9–1549) – medieval Jewish philologist, grammarian and lexicographer. 21i תשבי ( tišbi ) – a dictionary of Jewish midrashic and talmud compiled by Elia Levit. 1st edition – Isnу, 1541. 17s Targum uses this word in Ps. 44, which deals with jokes and ridicule. The female parts of the body are also called beth tourpa, and in Latin they are also called turpitudo (shame - Ed.) (French). 22i Pierre Jurieu (12/24/1637 – 01/11/1713) - one of the leaders of French Protestants; in 1674–1681 Professor of Theology and Jewish Language at the Sedan Academy. 23i In manuscript: Tharaph and Thourpa. Jurieu. Histoire. P. 458. 1g Approx. in the margins of the manuscript: a frivolous interpretation. 2g Note in the margins of the manuscript: see below § (the number is not indicated, but we are talking about § 4. - Ed.). 24i Heinrich Ewald (Georg Heinrich August Ewald; November 16, 1803 – May 4, 1875) – German Protestant theologian and exegete, one of the largest Orientalists of his time; professor of philosophy, theology and oriental languages ​​at the universities of Göttingen (1827–1837; 1848–1867) and Tübingen (1838–1848); among his students is Ferdinand Hitzig (see note 34i). 25i פָנִים , pānîm is a Hebrew word, there is no such word in Arabic. Ewald, discussing the meaning of ancient Hebrew. the word tәrāpim, expresses the opinion that it belongs to the class of words that have a plural form. numbers, but denoting individual objects, the textbook representative of which is the ancient Hebrew. word panim, face. Ewald. Alterthümer. S. 298 etc. (2nd Ausg. S. 252). Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 232. 18s This name is given to these images because a mask is attached to their head. However, both the fact that the teraphim had masks and this etymology are equally unfounded (lat.). Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 232. 26i Ewald compares the Hebrew. tәrāpim from Arabic. ˀašrafa – observe and ṭarf- – eye, glance, thus justifying his assumption that the word tәrāpim can mean “face”, “mask”. 19s “bowed face” or “living mask” (German). 20s Greek word (Latin). 27i The paragraph number is not indicated in the manuscript. 28i tarfa/tarafa (see: Dillman C. Lexicon linguae aethiopicae. N. Y., 1955. Col. 557). Palmov. Idolatry; Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 232. 29i Ernst Heinrich Meier (05/17/1813 – 03/2/1866) – German orientalist; professor (since 1848) of Semitic languages ​​and literatures at the University of Tübingen; author of studies on the Hebrew and Phoenician languages, collector and researcher of German folklore, translator and commentator on Old Testament texts and ancient Indian poetry. 30i Meier E. Hebrӓisches Wurzelwörterbuch. Mannheim, 1845. 21s Believes that teraphim are images of deceased ancestors (lat.). – The quote is not from the original, since the glosses in Mayer’s dictionary are given in German. The reference was probably taken from Gesenius' Thesaurus: see author's note. 20. – Ed. 31i ˀaṭrāf- (Lane E. W. An Arabic Lexicon. Beirut, 1968. Pt. 5. P. 1844). The comparison of Arabic words with the root ṭrf and Hebrew or Aramaic words with the root trp is problematic from the point of view. comparative Semitology, since there is no regular correspondence between the root ṭ in Arabic and the root t in Hebrew or Aramaic. 32i Samuel Lee (1783–1852) - British Orientalist, professor of Arabic and Hebrew at Cambridge University, author of a grammar and dictionary of the Hebrew language. 33i Lee S. A Lexicon, Hebrew, Chaldee, and English. L., 1840. 34i Ferdinand Hitzig (06/23/1807 – 01/22/1875) – German theologian and biblical scholar, professor of theology at the universities of Zurich (1833–1860) and Heidelberg (1860–1875). 35i Johann Michaelis (Johann David Michaelis; 02/27/1717 – 01/22/1791) – German theologian and Orientalist, professor at the University of Göttingen. 36i Commentatio de Theraphis // Johannis Davidis Michaelis Commentationes in Societate Regia scientiae Goettingensi per annos 1758–1762 praelectae. Bremen, 1774 2. P. 1–11. 37i Caesar von Lengerke (Cäsar von Lengerke; 03/30/1803 – 1855) – German Protestant theologian and Orientalist, professor at the University of Königsberg. 38i Lengerke C. Kenaan, Volks- und Religionsgeschichte Israels. Königsberg, 1844. 39i Hitzig F. Die zwölf kleinen Propheten. Lpz., 1838. S. 139–140. 40i There are no such verbs in the Greek of classical monuments (Liddell-Scott) and patristic texts (Lampe). The word * τρηφάω (as well as not entirely correct transcriptions of Arabic words) was borrowed from Palmov’s book (Palmov. Idolatry. P. 193. Note), the text of which is retold in this place almost literally. The origin of * τριφάω could not be established. In Michaelis we are talking about the verb τρυφάω, “to live in luxury.” 41i turfat- (Lane. Op. cit. Pt. 1. P. 304). Gesenius. Thesaurus; Palmov. Idolatry. P. 193. Note; Jahn. Archäologie. S. 506. 43i Louis de Dieu (Ludovicus de Dieu, Louis de Dieu; 04/7/1590 – 12/23/1642) - Dutch Orientalist, Huguenot priest. 44i Johann Christian Konrad von Hofmann (12/21/1810 – 12/20/1877) – German Protestant theologian and exegete; professor of theological faculties at the universities of Erlangen (1841–1842; 1845–1877) and Rostock (1842–1845). 45i Hofmann J. Der Schriftbeweis: Ein theologischer Versuch. Nördlingen, 1852–1856. Bd. 1. S. 328. Gesenius. Thesaurus; Palmov. Idolatry. 46i Jacques Gaffarel (1601–1681) – French astrologer and Kabbalist, librarian to Cardinal Richelieu. 47i More precisely, there are a number of Semitic words, the root of which in Hebrew contains the phoneme š, and in Aramaic in the same position - t, a classic example of which is indeed the word “bull”, which has the root šwr in Hebrew, and twr in Aramaic. But in the word שְׂרָפִים, ŝǝrāpīm there is neither t nor š and it has nothing to do with the root šwr, therefore there is no logic in Gaffarel’s argumentation, at least in Florensky’s rendering. Unfortunately, Gaffarel’s own work is not available to us. 48i François de Monceau (François Monceau, François de Monceaux, Franciscus Moncaeius; mid-16th century, Arras - ?) - lawyer, poet and writer; Ambassador of the Duke of Parma Alexander Farnese to the court of Henry IV. 49i de Monceaux F. Aaron purgatus: De vitulo aureo. Atrebatum [Arras], 1607. 2 lib. – The author proposed a theory according to which the golden calf that Aaron made (Ex. 32) was not an idol, but an image of a cherub, which the Israelites worshiped as a god against the will of Aaron. Soon after publication, the book was included in the Index librorum prohibitorum. Jurieu. Histoire. P. 452, 458. 23s The authority of these two writers does not seem significant to me. There is nothing to say about Gaffarel: this writer is prone to erroneous quotations, and Monco is just a talker (French). 24s He is only a great teller of useless things... So the judgments of these two people do not deserve much respect (French). 50i Hieronymus of Stridon. Commentaries on the book of the prophet Hosea. 3. 4–5 // PL. T. 25. Col. 844–845. Reference in the manuscript: “Hieron. In Gen. XXX 1". 25s Teraphim are called in the proper sense μορφώματα, that is, images and images that we can in this case consider cherubim and seraphim or other elements of the decoration of the Church ... “without ephod and teraphim” - that is, without objects proper to the priest (lat.). Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 764.> Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 299. 51i In the manuscript – אלִֹהִים 52i According to the interpretation of Isa. 8:19, proposed in Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 41. The Synodal translation of this passage is a free interpretation of the original. 26s gods of the underworld (lat.). Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 40–41; Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 94–95. Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 96. Gesenius. Grammar. P. 336. Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2660. 53i This form does not appear in the Bible. Buchstorf draws on examples from post-biblical Jewish literature. 54i There is no such form in the Hebrew text of the Bible. 55i For these reasonings - starting from the words “... so it is natural to consider the beginning of it תרָָּף …” and until the end of the paragraph - see note. 87i. 56i Eduard (Édouard) Wilhelm Eugen Reuss; 07/18/1804 – 04/15/1891) – German Protestant theologian and exegete, one of the founders of the documentary theory of the origin of the Pentateuch; professor of New Testament (1834–1864) and Old Testament (from 1864) exegesis at the University of Strasbourg; author of a 16-volume annotated French translation of the Bible (1876–1879). 57i Emile Ferrière (1830 – ?) – French philosopher. Ferrière. Paganisme. P. 221; there is also a link to Reuss: La Bible. Ancien Testament/Ed. E. Reuss. Paris, 1877. Part. 1: Histoire des Israélites depuis conquète de la Palestine jusqu’à l’exil. P. 215. Jurieu. Histoire. P. 466. 58i Athanasius Kircher (05/2/1601 – 11/27/1680) – German scientist, Jesuit, author of works on various branches of knowledge, including mathematics, astronomy, music, acoustics, archeology, chemistry, optics, medicine, Oriental studies (Egyptology and Sinology), etc.; in 1635–1680 Professor of Physics, Mathematics and Oriental Languages ​​at the Collegium of Rome (University Gregorianum). 27s So that none of their members should be shaken or disintegrated, which would be a great disaster for them (lat.). Jurieu. Histoire. P. 454–460. 59i Franz Joseph Valentin Dominik Maurer (02/14/1795, Rottweil - 01/13/1874, Birlingen, Württemberg) - German exegete and Hebraist. 60i Maurer F. J. Commentarius Grammaticus historicus criticus in Prophetas minores. Lpz., 1840 61i Probably a mistake: if this is Heinrich Ewald, then he did not compile a dictionary of the Hebrew language; Palmov refers in this regard only to his work “Antiquities of the People of Israel” (Ewald. Alterthümer). Palmov. Idolatry; Gesenius. Thesaurus. 28s incision with a surgical scalpel (lat.). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2564. 29s are bust images, like herms (lat.). 30s half-length (bust) portraits, busts (Greek). 62i The paragraph number is not indicated in the manuscript. 31s Said r. Yehuda: “Teraphim are made only at certain and known times. Why are they called Teraphim? Because they lower and relax people’s hands, as it is said: “Now הֶרֶף (lower) your hand” (2 Samuel 24:16).” So, R. Yehuda believes that תְּרָפִים comes from the root רָפָה, because they distract the tillers from their work and make their hands slack. ...(To this) etymology R. also comes. Behai, who says: “... the word תְּרָפִים (tәrāpîm) comes from the expression נִרְפִּים (nirpîm) (that is, תְּרָפִים from the root רָפָה, meaning “to be weakened, loose”), and calls (Holy Scripture. – Ed.) their (teraphim. – Ed.) תְּרָפִים in the sense of רָפִים (rāpîm) (loose, relaxed, weak) to show that their (teraphim. – Ed.) words are, as it were, נְבוּּאָה רָפָה, that is, “weak, empty and useless prophecy”” (Latin). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2664. Gesenius. Thesaurus. T. 3/1. P. 1303. 32s about lowered hands (lat.). 33s about the people themselves (lat.). 34s about other subjects (lat.). 35s inhabitants of the underworld, shadows of the dead, living in the underworld, whom the ancient Jews imagined as lacking blood, life force (נֶפֶשׁ), as well as willpower (Ps. 89:11; Prov. 2:18). Gr. Venet. νεκροί, in Proverbs. 21 – τεθνηκότες (lat.). See: Jurieu. Histoire. P. 458. 36s Because idols weaken piety (French). 37s restrain, calm (lat.). Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 1303. 63i Julius Fürst (pseud. Alsari; 05/12/1805 – 02/09/1873) – German orientalist; Professor (since 1864) of Oriental languages ​​at the University of Leipzig. 64i Fürst J. Librorum sacrorum Veteris Testamenti concordantiae hebraicae atque chaldaicae. Lpz., 1840. 65i Franz Julius Delitzsch (02/23/1813 – 03/04/1890) – German theologian, exegete and Orientalist, expert in rabbinic literature; Professor of Old Testament at the Universities of Leipzig, Rostock and Erlangen. 66i Delitzsch F. Commentar über die Genesis. Lpz., 1872. Ibidem; Palmov. Idolatry. 67i Probably Albert Schultens (1686 – 01/26/1750) – Dutch Orientalist; professor (1732–1750) of oriental languages ​​at Leiden University, leading European Arabist of his time. 68i Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (10/16/1752 – 06/27/1827) – German theologian and Orientalist; professor of oriental languages ​​at the theological faculty of the University of Jena (1775–1788), professor of oriental languages, exegesis and political history at the University of Göttingen (1788–1827). 69i Jacob Hamburger (11/10/1826–11/23/1911) – German rabbi, biblical scholar, expert on rabbinic writing, author of the first Jewish encyclopedia (Hamburger. Realencyklopädie). 70i “Targum Jonathan” - Targum Jonathan; the meaning of the reference "1 M 31" in this context cannot be explained: it is probably an error. 71i The transliteration “tārap h āh” (also in: Palmov. Idolatry. P. 184. Note) is problematic from the point of view. Arabic grammar. Probably the form taraffaha is meant (5th breed from the verb rafaha, to live in luxury, to prosper). The transliteration “tārap h a”, which is given below, corresponds to the grammatically correct, but not attested in dictionaries, form of the 3rd breed from the verb tarifa, to live in contentment, in luxury. 38s to possess in abundance the blessings and comforts of life, or to enjoy and rejoice in them, to be generously endowed with a happy life, to be pampered by a favorable fate and the blessings of life, to abound in the blessings and comforts of life (lat.). 39s From here it was concluded that the gods of the penates were called teraphim, as givers and protectors of life and fortune, who were worshiped for the sake of increasing and protecting household property (lat.). 40s to be in abundance, to abound (lat.). 41s plentiful, rich (lat.). 42s things that are superabundant, exceeding what is sufficient (lat.). 73i So in the manuscript, but apparently it should be “hif.”, i.e. “hifil breed.” 43s As household gods, the teraphim were considered the nourishers and breadwinners of the family, which is why they were called “teraphim”, i.e. “nourishers, breadwinners” ( תָּרַף – to feed, nourish Arabic tarifa and Hebrew טָרַף, to eat, in hif. – to feed) (German). Schenkel. Bibellexikon. S. 499; Palmov. Idolatry; Gesenius. Thesaurus; Ferrière. Paganisme. P. 221, he has a reference to Reuss’s “Hist. des Israelites" [see approx. 30). – Ed.]. P. 215; Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 128. 74i Hitzig F. Der Prophet Ezechiel. Lpz., 1847. (Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Alten Testament; 8). 75i Xenophon. Memories of Socrates (Memorabilia). I 4. 10. 76i Gods heal people (Greek). – Paraphrase of the indicated place from Xenophon. 77i Daniel Schenkel (12/21/1813 – 05/18/1885) – German Protestant theologian and exegete; author of the "Biblical Lexicon" (Schenkel. Bibellexikon). Brockhaus. Dictionary. T. 32a. P. 943. 44s I have no doubt that the Greek word θεραπεύειν, which means “to serve” and “to worship,” comes from the word “teraphim” (French). Jurieu. Histoire; Palmov. Idolatry; Gesenius. Thesaurus; Schenkel. Bibellexicon. S. 499; Hamburger. Realencyklopädie. S. 926. 45s It is clear that teraphim come from the root רפא, which in Eastern languages ​​means “preserve”, “heal”. I believe that at first these gods were called מְרָפ ׅ ים, merafins, that is, Sanatores, Dii Sospitatores, guardian gods, because Tav and Mem among the Jews could easily replace each other. But putting this aside, the name "teraphim" comes from the second person future tense form of the breed Piel תרפה, terappe, which means "thou shalt heal", this is the form of invocation that idolaters resorted to to call upon these guardian gods. Then from this verb terappe the plural noun “teraphim” was formed, denoting the gods who preserve and heal. The Greek word θεραπεύειν, “to heal,” is not further evidence that the teraphim were guardian gods, Dii servatores et Sospitatores. It seems to me that it cannot be denied that the Greek θεραπεύειν comes from “teraphim”, because there is no difference between them. And why else did the Greeks form the verb meaning “to heal” from the name of these idols, if not because these gods were considered the guardians of the health and well-being of the family? (French). 46s sew, stitch (Greek). x 78i In the manuscript – carpiendi. 47s wash away (Hebrew). 48s scold, reproach (Hebrew). 49s to tear, tear off (Hebrew). 51s treat, heal (lat.). 52s surgeon, doctor (lat.). 53s medical art, medical remedy (lat.). 79i In the manuscript – ἀκέστης. 56s sarcinator (from sarcio) – tailor repairman (lat.). 58s pacified, calmed (lat.). 59s healer relieves pain (lat.). 80i רפא does not have this meaning in Biblical Hebrew. 82i Müller F. M. The Science of Thought. L., 1887. 83i Max Müller (Friedrich Max Müller; 12/6/1823 – 10/28/1900) – German philological orientalist, one of the founders of Indology and comparative religion; first professor of comparative linguistics at Oxford University (1868–1875). 84i רפא does not have this meaning in Biblical Hebrew. 85i The manuscript has incorrect accentuation – ἡρῶες. 86i In the manuscript – תְּרַפַּא . Gesenius. Grammar. pp. 93–94. 87i... in the word תְּרַפַּא this א disappears, as well as the preceding patah... - These considerations indicate that the work was written in great haste, as well as the author’s idea of ​​the Hebrew and Aramaic languages, which is very far from reality. The word תְּרַפַּא (tәrappa) is not found in either Hebrew or Aramaic; the Hebrew form תְּרַפַּא (tәrappe) is grammatically possible (but not attested in the text of the Bible) (see also note 86). “Patakh” is the name of a subscript, a vowel, and not a sound, so it cannot “fall away”. By writing about the “falling away of patah,” the author clearly confirmed that the form תְּרַפַּא ( tәrappa ) arose not from an unfortunate oversight, but intentionally. Given this beginning of the argument, everything that follows until the end of the paragraph (with the exception of the quotation from Gesenius's Grammar) must be considered meaningless. Gesenius. Thesaurus. P. 1521; Palmov. Idolatry; Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 131; Jurieu. Histoire. P. 450; Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2660 etc. 88i Publ.: Septuaginta / Ed. A. Ralfs. Stuttgart, 1979, only θαραφιν, θεραφιν, θεραπειν. 89i Philo Judaeus. Legum allegoriarum libri. II 46 // Philonis Alexandrini Opera quae supersunt / Ed. L. Cohn. B., 1896. T. 1. [P. 74]. 61s carved, engraved or hollowed-out images (Greek). 62s κενοτάφιον – (lit. empty tomb) cenotaph(s), tomb-monument not containing a body (Greek). 64s half-length (bust) portraits, busts (German). 90i Hieronymus Stridonensis. Quaestiones hebraicae in Genesim. 31. 19 // PL. T. 23. Col. 986. 91i More precisely - priso, , or, in East Syriac, prisā. 68s Ordinary objects of priestly service (lat.). See the quotation from Jerome in: Scholz. Götzendienst. steam. 132 1. Jurieu. Histoire. P. 450. Texts - according to the Synodal Bible. 93i In the manuscript – בִלְהָה. Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 445: נָשִׁים אִשָּׁה ; S. 65: נָשִׁים דֶּרֶךְ – “Menstruation.” 94i In the manuscript – ּ אֶת־אֱהֵי הָסִרוּ . Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 40: אֵלָה – sacred cult tree, name of various types of evergreen trees (Ilex, Terebinthe). Therebinthe, terevinth by Rev. Philaret. Riehm. Worterbuch. Bd. 2. S. 1648: the botanical name of this plant is Pistacia terebinthus L., Terpentinbaum, and among the Arabs - baṭm; in Russian - pistachio tree. This plant was once a valuable product of Palestine, but now it is not found there. In Luther's German translation terebenth is translated by Eiche, oak, and in Hosea (4:13) by Buche, beech. However, it is difficult to decide whether the main text is talking about terebinth or oak. פֶּסֶל, pesel – Schnitzbild (carved image (German). – Ed.); מַסֵּכָה – massēk h āh – Gusswerk (casting (German). – Ed.). See Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 98. 95i In the manuscript – אֶת־אֱלֹהִי . 96i In the manuscript – לַיהוָֹה ָ . Siegfied, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 668: קֶסֶם – das Entnehmen einer sakralen Vorbedeutung, das Orakelsuchen, die Orakelentscheidung, das Los, Wahrsagelohn [German. fortune telling, questioning of the oracle, lot, fortune telling tool. – Ed. ]. Siegfied, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 16: “אָוֶן – Falschheit, der falsche Kult, etische Falschheit [German. lies, worship of false gods, lies in a moral sense. – Ed. ]". Exact translation: “idolatry and teraphim.” Siegfied, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 282: כְּבִיר – von Ziegenhaaren, Fliegennetz [German. about goat hair, a canopy that protects against insects. – Ed. ]; cf.: מַכְבֵּר and κωνώπιον in Yud. 10, 21. 97i The words in brackets correspond to the words “on the bed”; the correspondence to the expression “at the head” would be: מְרַאֲשֹׁתָיו. 98i In the manuscript: ch. XXXII. Sigfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 124, 123: גִּלֻּלִים, גִּלּוּלִים – Dreckdinger, prophet. Schmähname für Götzen [German. dirty tricker, an insulting name for idols in the language of the prophets. – Ed. ]. 99i In the manuscript, Hebrew. The text is given with errors and distortion of word order: וְאֶת־הַגִּלֻּלִים וְאֵת בָּל־הוֹשִׁקֻּצִים אֶת־הָאֹבוֹת וְאֶתְּרָפרפים Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2079: לְמִקְסַם קְסַם – ad divinandum divinationem [lat. for fortune telling. – Ed. ]; Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 668: קָסַם – sacrale Vorbedeutung (omina) entnehmen, wahrsagen [German. guess, predict. – Ed. ]; this is infinitive; accordingly the name קֶסֶם – das Entnehmen einer (sacralen) Vorbedeutung, das Orakelsuchen, das Orakelentscheidung [German. fortune telling, questioning the oracle. – Ed. ]. 100i In the manuscript – הַקֶּסֵם . 101i In the manuscript, the original text is given out of place, that is, after the words “and they tell you false fortunes,” with errors and distortion of the word order: כִִּדִּינִין וְהָיָה לָהֶם כִּקְסָים 102i The word order is distorted in the manuscript: Please contact us מַצֵּּבָה, according to Siegfrid and Stade (Siegfrid, Stade. Wörterbuch) – Heiligerstein, Opferstein [sacred stone, sacrificial stone. – Ed. ]; but Jurieu and some. others translate “statue” instead of altar. זבֶחַ – das Schlachten, das Schlachtopfer, ein Opferkomplez [slaughter (of livestock), sacrifice. – Ed.]. 103i The word order is distorted in the manuscript: Home page Home page Please contact us Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 16: אָוֶן – Wertloses reden [German. talk. – Ed. ]; S. 668: קוֹסְמִים or קֹסְמִים – die Wahrsager [German. predictors. – Ed. ], from קָסַם – wahrsagen [German. predict. – Ed. ]; חָזוֹן – das Traumgesicht, das im Hellsehen empfangene Orakel [German. prophetic dream; prophecy received by a clairvoyant. – Ed. ]; p. 191. חָזוּּת – etwas, was in die Augen fӓllt, das prophetische Schauen etc. [German revelation, prophetic vision, etc. - Ed. ]; p. 831: שֶׁקֶר – der Trug, der Betrug, die Täuschung [German. lie, deception, delusion. – Ed. ]. 104i In the manuscript - Jacob. 3g Note in the margin of the manuscript: “Perhaps so. But it would not hurt to take into account here that the image of the relationship of idolaters to their gods does not always correspond to our concepts of reverence. Samoyeds to this day take idols by the bosom when going hunting, and in case of failure, throw them to the ground, trample them underfoot and curse them, and all this does not prevent in the opposite cases from again putting up with idols and bowing before them.” Flavius. Antiquities. I 19.11. Given in the books: Sefer ha-Yashar; Berachot 42; Baba Batra, 126; Pirke Dr. Rabbi Eliezer; Midrash Tanhuma; see: Levner. Legends. P. 105. Filaret. Notes. P. 91. 70s The vile superstition of amulets, which includes those earrings that men cling to the edge on one side of their ears, is not to please people, but to serve demons (lat.). 106i Augustinus Hipponensis. Epistulae. 245.2 // PL. T. 33. Col. 1060–1061. 4g Approx. in the margins to the words “Russian custom” and “entered”, the author underlined the note: “There is a more reasonable explanation for this custom.” 107i In the manuscript – נַ ֽ זַמֵי . 108i In the manuscript – אֶת־נ ׅ זֵמֵי . 109i In the manuscript – בֵּעֵבֶר. 110i In the manuscript – אבְרָהָם . 111i In the manuscript – אֱלֹה ׅ ים אֲהֵרִים . 112i In the manuscript – אַהֵר. For legends about Terah, who allegedly had a shop for selling idols, see Levner (Levner. Legends. P. 39) and Jurieu (Jurieu. Histoire. P. 481). 71s Piel is the active form of the verb, denoting the intense action expressed in the verb, directed towards the object. Iterative, causative and privative (lat.) are important. Zapletal. Grammatica. P. 53. Siegfried, Stade. Worterbuch. S. 415. 72s To receive an omen (by observing the signs that a deity sends to communicate his will) (German). 113i Keil C. F. Biblischer Commentar über die Bücher Mose’s // Biblischer Commentar über das Alte Testament / Hrsg. v. C. F. Keil, F. Delitzsch. Lpz., 1861. Bd. 1: Genesis und Exodus. S. 209. 114i In the manuscript – נֵחָשִׁים . 72s Omen (German, ancient Greek). 73s Receiving an Omen (German). 115i In the manuscript – נֵחַשׁ. 116i In the manuscript – נִחָשִׁים . Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 69. 74s nichaschti – I found out through snake fortune telling (German). 75s Luther translates this, however, as “to conjure”, “to listen to the cry of birds”; others - “I have a presentiment”, “I assume” (German). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 1329, 1330. Iamblichus, Damascius (in Photius), Varro (in Augustine), Pliny, Psellus and others talk about this, see: Scholz: Götzendienst. S. 69 ff.; Jurieu. Histoire. P. 469 etc. Note that a number of new studies of “subliminal consciousness” shed a lot of light on these ancient practices and confirm what until now seemed impossible. 117i Moses Ben Nachman (משה בן נחמן, Moshe ben Nachman Gerondi, Nachmanides, R a MB a N (Rabbi Moshe Ben Nachman); Bonastruc ça Porta; 1194, Girona (Catalonia) - ca. 1270, Palestine) - medieval Jewish philosopher, physician, Kabbalist and exegete; commentary on the Pentateuch - the last and most voluminous of his works (first printed edition - Rome, before 1480). 118i Bahya (Behai) ben Asher ben Hlava ( בה ײ בן אשר ; XIII century, Zaragoza) - medieval Jewish exegete, preacher and kabbalist; one of his most famous works is a commentary on the Pentateuch (first printed edition - Naples, 1492). 119i Quadrant - an astronomical instrument, which is a metal plate in the shape of a quarter circle, installed in a vertical plane; used to measure the height of luminaries above the horizon and the angular distances between luminaries. 120i Ibn Ezra (Abraham ben Meir ibn Ezra, Abenezra, אברהם אבן עזרא ; 1089, Tudela (Spain) - ca. 1164, London) - medieval Jewish scientist (mathematician, astronomer, grammarian), philosopher, exegete and poet; the most significant of his exegetical works is a commentary on the Pentateuch, entitled “The Book of the Righteous” ( ספר הישר, Sefer ha-Yashar; first printed edition - Naples, 1488). Jurieu. Histoire. P. 451. 121i Aes corinthiacum is a valuable alloy mentioned in ancient texts, possibly consisting of copper and gold or copper and silver. Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 127. 76s Do teraphim speak? ...Rachel stole them so that they would not indicate to Laban that Jacob had run away (lat.). Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2661. Levner. Legends. pp. 72, 103. 77s Some say that Rachel stole them (i.e., the teraphim) in order to remove the idols from her father. But if so, why did she take them with her and not hide them along the way? Rather, Laban, her father, was an expert on the stars, and she was afraid that he would look at the stars and find out where they ran (lat.). Bixtorf. Lexicon. P. 2663. Flavius. Antiquities. I 19, 8. 78s Rachel takes her father's teraphim with her without telling her husband about it, so that their (Rachel and Jacob's) deeds would be successful (German). Riehm. Handwörterbuch. S. 1647. Filaret. Notes. C. 84. 5g Approx. in the margin: “see 57 pp.” Creuzer. Symbolik. S. 340; see also Wien (link to him in Palmov (“Idolatry”)) [This is a reference to Wiener (Wiener G. B. Biblisches Realwörterbuch. Lpz., 1848. Bd. 2. S. 608), who clearly distances himself from this opinion, as Palmov also points out (Palmov. Idolatry. P. 193. Note). – Ed. ]. 124i Georg Friedrich Creuzer (03/10/1771 – 02/06/1858) – German classic philologist; professor of philology and ancient history at the universities of Marburg (since 1802), Heidelberg (since 1804) and Leiden; Creuzer's first and most famous work, “Symbolism and Mythology of the Ancient Peoples, Especially the Greeks” (Creuzer. Symbolik), is based on the theory of the influence of Eastern cultures on ancient Greek mythology, traced in the works of Homer and Hesiod. 125i Johann Georg Benedikt Wiener (Wiener); 04/13/1789 – 05/12/1858) – German Protestant theologian, exegete and Orientalist; professor at the universities of Leipzig (1819–1823, from 1832) and Erlangen (1823–1832). 79s ...the Pelasgian people could attribute to the images of their marriage deities the power of communicating fertility. It is in the Samothrace cults that we find the custom of keeping these idols secretly. Something similar can be seen in the domestic cult of the Jewish forefathers. Rachel, who has been waiting for children for so long, keeps the teraphim with great care and secret (Gen. 31, etc.) (German). 80s penates promoting childbirth (German). Here, in passing, you can notice that in Op. Creuzer’s “Commentationes Herodoteae” (Lpz., 1819). Pars. 1. P. 277 (see: RThK. S. 551), Creuzer considers them to be figurines with a donkey-like appearance. Riehm. Handwörterbuch. S. 1450. 95) 126i In the manuscript – אפוֹד . Ewald. Alterthümer. S. 296–299. 81s As can be concluded from scattered references to them (the teraphim or household deities of Israel), the situation was as follows. An image of this kind was not whole, but, at least if its owner attached importance to beauty and perfection, it consisted of many parts. The simplest base made of stone or wood (the word פ פֶסֶל, pesel initially meant only an image made of stone, but gradually began to be used in relation to any idol (Ex. 20:4 cf. Judges 18:30) and took on the same general meaning as the Greek ξόανον), could represent an image of some kind of humanoid deity and in size to correspond to the human figure. However, already in early times, such an image in itself seemed too simple and therefore was often covered with gold or silver - over the entire surface or in certain places. Therefore, the sharp tongue of strict admirers of Yahweh, who hated any idolatry, speaks more readily and mockingly about carving and casting - that is, about the two components of such an idol. However, it is obvious that if there was a sufficient amount of noble metals, the idol could only be made by casting. Until now, the home idol, with the exception of its shape, was made in exactly the same way as any other idol. Now, for the first time, a feature appears that has become the hallmark of the ancient Israelite household deity. To understand this, it is necessary first of all to remember that these household deities have long been used for the purpose of obtaining predictions, so that the teraphim were considered exactly the same as the predictor gods. Such an image was equipped with an ephod, that is, a certain decoration worn on the shoulders, and a chest bag in which the lots for fortune telling were placed - just like the high priests. In addition, a certain mask was placed on the idol’s head, with the help of which, probably, the priest asking for a prediction was supposed to see whether the god wanted to give a prediction or not. These masks became a feature of such idols to such an extent that from the masks the idols themselves began to be called teraphim (see: § 1, III P. F. >). Thus, it becomes clear why in one case teraphim are called figures the size of a man, in another - small objects that can, for example, easily be hidden under a camel’s saddle (Gen. 31, 34). The fact is that each of the two parts of the long-revered and preserved household deity used in fortune telling was represented as the main one (German). 127i In the manuscript – כֹהֵן. 82s Micah's teraphim were dedicated to the true God (French). 128i In the manuscript – שְׁאַל־נָאֵ בֵֵ ֽ לֹהִים . 129i In the manuscript - “why did you take my elohim” אֶת־אֱלֹהִים . 130i In the manuscript – אֶת־אֶלֹהָ ֽ י . 131i In the manuscript – וּּתְּרָפִים וְאָוֶן . Flavius. Antiquities. VI 11, 4. 132i In the manuscript – ᾖ παρ. Palmov. Idolatry. P. 183. Note. 1). 99) 134i Wilhelm Martin Leberecht De Wette (01/12/1780 – 06/16/1843) – German Protestant theologian and exegete; professor at Heidelberg (from 1807), Berlin (1810–1819) and Basel (from 1822) universities. Ferrière. Paganisme. P. 223. 135i In the manuscript – קְסַם and קסום . Jurieu. Histoire. P. 459. 83s gods of roads, gods of crossroads (lat.). Jurieu. Histoire. P. 453; further information from there. 136i Blessed Jerome of Stridon. Commentaries on the book of the prophet Hosea. 3. 4–5 // PL. T. 25. Col. 844. 84s Indeed, since 70 commentators use δήλους where Aquila and Theodotion give φωτισμούς, both these words have the same meaning. Thus, we understand that on the chest, on the heart of the high priest, there must be ἀλήθεια καὶ φωτισμός, that is, truth and teaching (lat.). 137i John Spencer (1630–1693) - English theologian and Hebraist. 138i Spencer J. Dissertatio de Urim et Thummim in Deuteron. 33, 8: In qua eorum natura et origo, non paucorumrituum Mosaicorum rationes, et obscuriora quaedam Scripturae loca, probabiliter explicantur. Camb., (1670). Jurieu. Histoire. P. 454. 85s This passage from Hosea, misinterpreted, became the cause of the errors of Gaffarel, Monceau, Spencer and St. Jerome. But the common source of their error is that God's intention, in their opinion, is to predict that the Israelites will be left without the cult of Moses for a long time. But in fact, God wants to accurately describe the state in which the Jews find themselves now: without God - both true and false - without idolatry, but also without true cult. Therefore, on the one hand, He says: “there will be neither ephod nor זבח, sacrifice,” thus pointing to true worship and the Law of Moses. But, on the other hand, they will have neither מצבה, maṣṣēbā, statue, nor teraphim, that is, they will not be either idolaters or pagans prone to magic. And the fact that teraphim cannot be understood in a positive sense is clear from the word maṣṣēbā, statue, which cannot in any way be understood in a positive sense when it comes to worship. Thus, the meaning of this passage is this: “The time is coming when you will not worship statues for several centuries, but also you will not be able to know the will of God through the Urim and Thummim found in the ephod. This is the explanation of Kimhi... They will be many days without an ephod and without teraphim, that is, they will not have any opportunity to receive prophecies - neither false nor true, neither devilish nor divine, namely, no ephod to use the Urim and Thummim, nor teraphim to question the demons and with their help find out about their fate. And there is no clearer commentary on this passage than that of David Kimhi (see note 140 - Ed.): “The Prophet,” he says, “depicts the days of the captivity that befell us. We do not have a king, since we are under the rule of pagan kings and princes. We have no sacrifice to offer to the true God, but we also have no statue or idol to stand above the false gods. We do not have a sacred ephod that tells us the future through the Urim and Thummim, but we also do not have teraphim dedicated to idols, which, according to those who believe in them, control the future. This is our situation in captivity” (French). La Bible / Traduction nouvelle avec introductions et commentaires par Edouard Reuss. Ancient Testament. Part. 2: Les Prophètes. P., 1876. T. 1. P. 144. 86s sacred stone, altar (German). Jahn. Archologie. S. 481. 87s every monument, especially pagan monuments and statues (German). 140i David Kimhi (דוד קמחי, R D K (Rabbi David Kimhi); 1160 (?) – 1235 (?)) - medieval Jewish grammarian, philosopher and exegete; author of a number of works on the grammar and vocabulary of the Hebrew language, which were later widely used by Christian Hebraists; author of commentaries on the books of Chronicles (1–2 Chronicles), Genesis, Prophets (Joshua, Judgment, 1–4 Kings, Isa, Jer, Ezekiel, 12 “minor” prophets) and Psalms. 141i In the manuscript – אֶוֶן . 142i In the manuscript – דִּבִּרוּ . Compare: Ferrière. Paganisme. P. 225. See: Buxtorf. Lexicon. P. 2060; The Hebrew text (without vocalization) is also given there. 143i Next to the end of the paragraph are partially translated into Russian extracts from the article “תְּרָפִים” of Buxtorf’s “Lexicon”. 144i Babylonian Talmud. Tractate "Avoda Zara". 29b. 88s Commercial transactions and trade with those who worship idols are prohibited (lat.). 145i Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer (פרקי דרבי אליעזר, lit. - Chapters of Rabbi Eliezer) - a treatise that is an interpretation of the books of Genesis, Exodus (partially) and Numbers (partially); dates from after 833; in tradition attributed to Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (c. 80–118). 89s What are teraphim? They killed the firstborn, cut off his head, salted it and doused it with oil; they wrote the name of a certain unclean spirit on a gold plate and placed it under the tongue. Then they placed this head on the wall, brought lamps to it and worshiped it, and this image spoke to them. But how do we know what the teraphim said? From what is said: “the teraphim speak empty things” (Zechariah 10:2). That's why Rachel stole them, so that they wouldn't tell Laban about Jacob's flight (lat.). 146i Targum of Pseudo-Jonathan (Jerusalem Targum, Palestine Targum) - translation of the Torah into Aramaic, known until the 14th century. as the Palestinian Targum (Targum Eretz Israel) or the Jerusalem Targum (Targum Yerushalmi), but subsequently erroneously identified with the Targum of Jonathan - the Aramaic translation of the Prophets, the author of which in the Talmudic tradition is considered to be Rabbi Jonathan ben Uziel (1st century BC - 1st century AD). 90s And Laban went to call the sheep, and meanwhile Rachel stole the images. The fact is that they killed the first-born male, cut off his head, placed it in salt and aromas, put a golden plate with spells written on it under her tongue, mounted this head on the wall, and she spoke to them. This is what these images were that her father worshiped (lat.). 147i Probably Shlomo ben Yitzchak (רבי שלמה יצחקי, R a SHI (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki); 1040–1105) - medieval Jewish exegete and commentator on the Tanakh and Talmud; his commentary on the Pentateuch became the first Jewish book to be printed (Reggio di Calabria, 1475). 91s Teraphim are images that were made to speak through magic. Those who made them had to wait for a certain hour and time of year suitable for this task (lat.). 92s Teraphim is an image that is made to speak by magical means. It is made by a certain hour, after which the image constantly speaks (lat.). 93s Teraphim are images made for a specific, appropriate hour; and then they speak by themselves and communicate the secret (lat.). 94s And there is no ephod, neither indicating the future or the secret (lat.). 149i Probably David Kimhi, see note. 140i. 95s The teraphim are considered by some interpreters to be idols, since such were the teraphim of Laban, which Rachel stole. Laban was an idolater, as can be seen from what he says about them: “Why have you stolen my gods?” No, let there not be an idol in the house of David. Others say that it is a kind of copper object made in order to see in it the length of the day and even favorable star signs about the future. This may be appropriate in the case of Laban, but in the case of Michal it is difficult to explain why she placed him on the bed instead of David, since it is obvious that the use of such an object in this case is inappropriate (lat.). 96s Teraphim are images with the help of which one learns about the future (lat.). 97s Some say that the teraphim is a kind of copper object with the help of which the time of day was known. Others say that among those knowledgeable in the stars it is considered an achievement to produce, by a certain hour, such an image that would speak. In confirmation of this it is said: “For the teraphim speak empty things” (Zechariah 10:2). But that is not the meaning of this place itself. It is more likely, in my opinion, that the teraphim had the appearance of a man and was made in such a way that it could perceive a higher power; which, however, I cannot explain. This is confirmed by the fact that the teraphim that Saul’s daughter Michal laid on the bed was such that the guards decided that it was David himself. At the same time, the verse: “without ephod and teraphim” (Hos. 3:4) has two interpretations. The first says: “There will be neither king nor prince in Israel, for the Lord has not chosen a king not from the line of David,” which is why it is further said: “and they will seek the Lord their God and David their king.” Further: “there will be neither sacrifice nor statue,” that is, for idolatry, “there will be no ephod,” of course, because the servants of Baal made an ephod similar to the ephod of Moses, so it is said אפוד (some kind of ephod), and not האפוד (that same ephod), as in this place הגישה האפוד (bring the ephod – 1 Samuel 23:9). So, אפוד, the ephod should not be understood as being said about the ephod that Moses made, as I will show in my place with the most reliable reasoning, if God wills. Another interpretation is that they did not honor either God or idols. Laban called the teraphim אלוהיו, “his gods.” Some say that Rachel stole them (i.e., the teraphim) in order to remove the idols from her father. But if so, why did she take them with her and not hide them along the way? Rather, Laban, her father, was an expert on the stars, and she was afraid that he, looking at the stars, would find out where they ran (lat.) 150i Levi ben Gershon (רבי לוי בן גרשון, R a LB a G (Rabbi Levi Ben Gershon), Gersonides, Maestre Leo de Bagnols, Magister Leo Hebraeus, Gersonides; 1288–1344) - medieval Jewish philosopher, mathematician, astronomer and exegete. 98s Teraphim is an image in the form of a man, as seen in the story of Michal, daughter of Saul. This image was made at a certain time, at the very moment when the possibility of fortune telling from images appeared, and it was believed that it spoke in a quiet voice, as if to itself, about future affairs that occupied his consciousness. However, this image (or statue) did not speak - which is impossible, since speech can only arise in those organs with which God has provided nature (lat.). 151i Moses Maimonides (רבי משה בן מימון, R a MB a M (Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon), Musa ibn Maymun; 1135–1204) - the largest medieval Jewish philosopher. Among the works of Maimonides there are no biblical commentaries, but in general in his work biblical exegesis is given a significant place, therefore the link to the commentary on Gen. 31, 19, borrowed by the author from Buxtorf’s Lexicon, is difficult to clarify. 99s According to Rambam, teraphim are objects used to determine time, for fortune telling and predicting the future (lat.). 152i Zohar (ספר זהר, lit. - Book of Radiance) - a mystical commentary on the Pentateuch, written in Aramaic; the most important book of Kabbalistic literature. 100s What are Teraphim? These are idols. Why were they called תרפים? Because of dishonor - just as we say במקום התורף, that is, in the meaning of “indecency” or “shame”, or “dishonor” (Latin). 101s Said r. Yehuda: “Teraphim are made only at certain and known times. Why are they called Teraphim? Because they lower and relax people’s hands, as it is said: “Now הֶרֶף (lower) your hand” (2 Samuel 24:16)” (Latin). 153i The source of this quotation could not be determined. 154i Midrash Tanchuma - a collection consisting of sermons on the topics of weekly readings from the Pentateuch and interpretations of these readings, named after Rabbi Tanchuma bar Abba (2nd half of the 4th century), who in tradition is considered its author. 102s Why are they called teraphim? Because they are obscene and ugly (lat.). 103s The word תְּרָפִים (tәrāpîm) comes from the expression נִרְפִּים (nirpîm) (that is, תְּרָפִים from the root רָפָה, meaning “to be weakened, loose"), and calls (Holy Scripture. - Ed.) them (teraphim. - Ed.) תְּרָפִים in the sense of רָפִים (rāpîm) (loose, relaxed, weak), to show that their words are, as it were, נְבוּּאָה רָפָה, that is, “weak, empty and useless prophecy” (lat.). This information from the biography, as well as others, can still be found in Chwolsohn’s work “Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus” (Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. XXVIII-XXX). 156i Daniil Avraamovich Khvolson (12/10/1820, Vilnius - 04/5/1911, St. Petersburg) - Russian orientalist; professor of oriental languages ​​at St. Petersburg University (since 1855) and St. Petersburg Theological Academy (since 1858). Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. 388–390 (§ 4). I am making a Russian translation from Khvolson’s German translation. Note that the tone of the story, the silence about the murder of the victim and the analogy with what follows make us think that this man is sitting in the oil alive; otherwise there would be no point in strengthening it in the pool. It would be enough to just put it down. For biographical information, see Chwolsohn (Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. XVI-XXVI). 104s Anthropomancy using human flesh or the entrails of children, maidens or pregnant women (lat.). 105s The soul is horrified to tell what atrocities were hidden in what was called the “shrine”: how many severed children’s heads with gilded lips were found there (lat.). 158i Rufinus. Church history. II 24 // PL. 21. Col. 533. Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. 150. 159i Theodoret of Cyrrhus. Church history. III 22 // PG. 82. Col. 1120. 106s Chaldean mysteries (lat.). 160i Ammiani Marcellini Rerum Gestarum libri qui supersunt / Ed. W. Seyfarth. Lpz., 1978. 161i Mishnah (משנה, lit. repetition) is the most important text of rabbinic Judaism after the Tanakh (Bible); a collection of treatises codifying the oral Jewish tradition in the form of a series of, as a rule, polemical statements by authoritative rabbinic teachers on private issues of religious life; central part of the Talmud; contains texts of various origins, mainly reflecting rabbinic polemics of the period 70–200 AD. n. e. 162i המדבר משחיו, hammedabber miššiḥyo – lit. speaking from the armpit. 163i This text is found in: Mishnah. Sanhedrin. 7. 7. 165i In Chwolson (Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. 151) – “Commentar z. d. St.”, that is, “Commentar zu der Stelle,” “commentary on the passage [mentioned above],” (S. 150) Mishnah. Sanhedrin. 7, 7 (see note 163i.). 166i Tosefta (תספתא, addition) – a collection of texts thematically, structurally and chronologically corresponding to the Mishnah, but less authoritative; content partly complements and partly repeats the texts of the Mishnah. 167i Mishneh Torah (משנה תורה, lit. - Repetition of the Torah; another name - Yad Ha-Chazaka, יד החזקה, lit. - Hand of Power) is a collection of Jewish religious legal norms compiled by Moses Maimonides in 1170–1180. 168i Photius of Constantinople. Library. Codex 242. 169i Josephus. Jewish antiquities. XVIII 9.5. 170i Lucian Sophist. About the Syrian goddess. 10. 171i Maurus Servius Honoratus. Commentary on Virgil's Aeneid. VI 68. 107s Small images that were carried on stretchers and were used to tell fortunes by their movements (lat.). 172i Eusebius of Caesarea. Church history. IX 3. The text quoted by P. Florensky is a paraphrase of the indicated passage from the “Church History” of Eusebius of Caesarea. 108s Meanwhile, it would be wise to get acquainted with the most important passage from this work, which reports that not long ago, near Antioch, an idol of Zeus the Friendly was consecrated, which was equipped with certain unclean magical tricks, which misled those who looked at it, appearing to perform certain miracles and answer questions, of which everyone and the emperors themselves were convinced (lat.). 173i Baphomet - an image of a certain deity who, according to the protocols of the Templar trial of 1307, was secretly worshiped by the templars. 174i von Hammer-Purgstall J. Mysterium Baphometis revelatum, seu fratres militiae Templi, qua gnostici et quidem ophiani apostasiae, idoloduliae et impuritatis convicti per ipsa eorum monumenta // Fundgruben des Orients. 1816. Bd. 6/1. S. 3 ff. 109s There is a rumor about Herbert that he cast a head from metal (after carefully studying the stars and at the moment when all the planets were about to begin their path), which answered questions, but only in the affirmative or negative. For example, Herbert will ask: “Will I be a dad?” The statue answers: “Yes.” “Will I die before I celebrate Mass in Jerusalem?” "No". (lat.). [- We are talking about Herbert of Avrilak, who became Pope Sylvester II in 999 († 1003) (Ed.)]. 175i Selden J. De Di[i]s Syris Syntagmata. L., 1617. Note that these same or similar examples are also described by Scholz (Scholz. Götzendienst), Jurieu (Jurieu. Histoire), etc. Glagolev. Essays. pp. 32–34. 176i Gudea - ruler (ensi) of the Sumerian state of Lagash (c. 2144–2124 BC), representative of the second dynasty of Lagash. Gudea's texts are inscriptions that tell the story of Gudea's achievements as a ruler and legislator. 177i The site of Tell Telo (Iraq) is an archaeological site of the Sumerian city of Girsu, the capital of the state of Lagash during the reign of Gudea. 6g Approx. in the margins: A completely similar method of magical actions with the skull of the firstborn exists among the Tamils ​​(in Ceylon); see my Sacred Renaming for details; pp. 61–62 [see: Priest Pavel Florensky. Sacred renaming. M., 2006 (Ed.)]. 110s there is no third option (lat.). Ewald. Alterthümer. S. 296–299. 111s This is what, without a doubt, the most ancient folk household deities were. Given their extraordinary vitality, thanks to which many elements of everyday culture, despite the strict prohibitions of the religion of Yahweh, underwent only minor changes, it is not at all surprising that over the centuries many sought protection from these household deities and expected predictions from them, but seeing Yahweh himself in this image. This crude veneration of Yahweh, having arisen in individual families, subsequently spread more widely, so that even the descendants of Moses adopted a similar cult in the north of the Promised Land - in the region of Dan. It is absolutely incredible that this destructive custom would spread only in the very center of the kingdom. And as soon as through the efforts of Samuel the movement of renewal of the true religion gained predominance, this custom ceased to be observed, at least in so manifest a manner as is certainly reported of Dan. However, in some families the veneration of teraphim continued for a very long time (German). Ferrière. Paganisme. P. 220, 225. Chwolsohn. Ssabier. Bd. 2. S. 155. 179i Herodotus. Story. II 48. 180i Sextus Pompeius Festus. De Verborum Significatione (Sextus Pompey Fest. On the meaning of words). 181i Lobeck Chr. A. Aglaophamus, sive Theologiae mysticae Graecorum causis libri tres. Regimontii Prussorum, 1829 Scholz. Götzendienst. S. 132–133; Palmov. Idolatry. Jurieu. Histoire. P. 482. 112s natural gods (lat.). 113s souls consecrated and canonized (French). 114s inner hearing (French). 182i Robert Bellarmine (Robertro Francesco Romolo Cardinale Bellarmino; 1542–1621) – Catholic theologian and polemicist; Jesuit, cardinal (from 1599). I would like the statues, called teraphim, to speak and answer in a clear voice, as if emanating from the statue (French). Palmov. Idolatry. C. 189. See Lopukhin (Lopukhin. History). T. 1. P. 374. On p. 370 figure in question. You might be interested in: