Celibacy being the rule of Essenism, the ranks of the brotherhood had to be filled up by recruits from the Jewish community at large. They preferred taking children, whom they educated most carefully and taught the practices of the order, believing that of such the kingdom of heaven is best made up. Every grown-up candidate (ὁ ζηλῶν) had to pass through a noviciate of two stages, which extended over three years, before he could be finally admitted into the order. Upon entering the first stage, which lasted twelve months, the novice (νεοσύστατος) had to cast all his possessions into the common treasury. He then received a copy of the regulations of the brotherhood (δίαιταν τοῦ τάγματος), as well as a spade (σκαλίς ἁξινάριον = יתד), to bury the excrement, (comp. Deut. xxiii, 12–14 ,) an apron (περίζωμα = זריז), used at the lustrations, and a white robe (λευκὴν ἐσθῆτα = בגד לבן) to put on at meals, being the symbols of purity. During the whole of this period he was an outsider, and was not admitted to the common meals, yet he had to observe some of the ascetic rules of the Society. If, at the close of this stage, the community found that he had properly acquitted himself during the probationary year, the novice was admitted into the second stage, which lasted two years, and was called an approacher (προσίων ἔγγιον). During the period which lasted two years he was admitted to a closer fellowship with the brotherhood, and shared in their lustral rites (καθαρωτέρων πρὸς τῶν ἁγνείαν ὑδάτων μεταλαμβάνει), but was still not admitted to the common meals (εἰς τὰς συμβιώσεις), nor to any office. If he passed satisfactorily through the second stage of probation, the approacher became an associate, or a full member of the society (ὁμιλητὴς, [[12]]ὃς εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον ἐγκρίνεται = חבר), when he was received into the brotherhood and partook of the common meal (συμβιωτὴς).
Before, however, he was made a homiletes, or finally admitted into close fellowship, he had to bind himself by a most solemn oath (this being the only occasion on which the Essenes used an oath) to observe three things. 1. Love to God. 2. Merciful justice towards all men; especially to honor nobody as master, to avoid the wicked, to help the righteous, to be faithful to every man, and especially to rulers (τοῖς κρατοῦσιν), for without God no one comes to be ruler. And 3. Purity of character, which implied humility, love of truth, hatred of falsehood, strict secrecy towards outsiders, so as not to divulge the secret doctrines (μυστήρια) to any one, and perfect openness with the members of the order, and, finally, carefully to preserve the books belonging to their sect (τὰ τῆς αἱρέσεως αὐτῶν βιβλία), and the names of the angels (τὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων ὀνόματα) or the mysteries connected with the Tetragrammaton (שם המפורש) and the other names of God and the angels, comprised in the theosophy (מעשה מרכבה) as well as with the cosmogony (מעשה בראשית) which also played so important a part among the Jewish mystics and the Kabbalists.
The three sections consisting of candidate (ὁ ζηλῶν), approacher (περουσιῶν ἔγγιον), and associate (ὁμιλητὴς, ὃς εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον ἐγκρίνεται), were subdivided into four orders, distinguished from each other by superior holiness. So marked and serious were these distinctions, that if one belonging to a higher degree of purity touched one who belonged to a lower order, i.e., if one of the fourth or highest order came in contact with one of the third or lower order, or if one of the third touched one of the second order, or if one of the second order touched one of the first or lowest order, he immediately became impure, and could only regain his purity by lustrations. From the beginning of the noviciate to the achievement of the [[13]]highest spiritual state, there were eight different stages which marked the gradual growth in holiness. Thus, after being accepted as a novice and obtaining the apron (זריז—περίζωμα) the symbol of purity, he attained (1) to the state of outward or bodily purity by baptisms (זריזות מביאה לידי נקיות). From this state of bodily purity he progressed (2) to that stage which imposed abstinence from connubial intercourse (נקיות מביאה לידי פרישות), or to that degree of holiness, which enabled him to practise celibacy. Having succeeded in mortifying the flesh in this respect, he advanced (3) to the stage of inward or spiritual purity (פרישות מביאה לידי טהרה). From this stage again he advanced (4) to that which required the banishing of all anger and malice, and the cultivation of a meek and lowly spirit (טהרה מביאה לידי ענוה). This led him (5) to the culminating point of holiness (ענוה מביאה לידי הסידות). Upon this summit of holiness he became (6) the temple of the Holy Spirit, and could prophesy (חסידות מביה לידי רה״ק). Thence again he advanced (7) to that stage in which he was enabled to perform miraculous cures, and raise the dead (רוח הקדש לידי תחה״מ). And finally, he attained (8) to the position of Elias the forerunner of the Messiah (תחה״מ לידי אליהו).
The earnestness and determination of these Essenes to advance to the highest state of holiness were seen in their self-denying and godly life; and it may fairly be questioned whether any religious system has ever produced such a community of saints. Their absolute confidence in God and resignation to the dealings of Providence; their uniformly holy and unselfish life; their unbounded love of virtue, and utter contempt for worldly fame, riches or pleasure; their industry, temperance, modesty and simplicity of life; their contentment of mind and cheerfulness of temper; their love of order, and abhorrence of even the semblance of falsehood; their benevolence and philanthropy; their love for the brethren, [[14]]and their following peace with all men; their hatred of slavery and war; their tender regard for children, and reverence and anxious care for the aged; their attendance on the sick, and readiness to relieve the distressed; their humility and magnanimity; their firmness of character and power to subdue their passions; their heroic endurance under the most agonizing sufferings for righteousness’ sake; and their cheerfully looking forward to death, as releasing their immortal souls from the bonds of the body to be for ever in a state of bliss with their Creator—have hardly found a parallel in the history of mankind. No wonder that Jews, of different sects, Greeks and Romans, Christian church historians, and heathen writers have been alike constrained to lavish the most unqualified praise on this holy brotherhood. It seems that the Saviour of the world, who illustrated simplicity and innocence of character by the little child which he took up in his arms, also showed what is required for a holy life in the Sermon on the Mount by a description of the Essenes. So remarkably does this brotherhood exemplify the lessons which Christ propounds in Matth. chap v. , &c.
This leads us to consider the question about the origin of this brotherhood, and their relationship to Judaism and Christianity. The assertion of Josephus that they “live the same kind of life which among the Greeks has been ordered by Pythagoras” (vide infra, p. 226, § 4,) has led some writers to believe that Essenism is the offspring of Pythagorism. The most able champion for this view is Zeller, the author of the celebrated History of Philosophy. He maintains[2] “that Essenism, at least as we know it from Philo and Josephus, has, in its essence, originated under Greek and especially under Pythagorean influences,” and tries to support his conclusion by the following summary of the supposed resemblances between Neo-Pythagorism and Essenism. (1) “Both strive to attain to superior holiness by an ascetic life. [[15]](2) Both repudiate animal sacrifices, the eating of animal food, wine and marriage. (3) Both of them are, however, not quite agreed among themselves about the latter point; for on both sides there are some who recommend marriage, but restrict connubial intercourse to procreation. (4) Moreover, both demand simplicity of life. (5) Both refrain from warm baths. (6) Both wear white garments, especially at dinner time. (7) Both lay the greatest value upon their purification and eschew everything unclean. (8) Both prohibit oaths, because a pious man does not require them. (9) Both find their social ideal in institutions which it is true were only realized by the Essenes, and in living together with perfect community of goods and unconditional subordination of individuals to their overseers. (10) Both insist on strict secresy about their schools. (11) Both like symbolic representations of their doctrines. (12) Both support themselves on an allegorical interpretation of ancient traditions, whose authority they recognise (13) Both worship higher powers in the elements, and pray to the rising sun. (14) Both seek to keep everything unclean from their sight, and for this reason have peculiar prescriptions about the discharge of the duties of nature. (15) Both cultivate the belief in intermediate beings between the supreme Deity and the world. (16) Both devote themselves to magic arts. (17) Both regard above all things the gift of prophesy as the highest fruit of wisdom and piety, and both boast to possess this gift in their most distinguished members. (18) Finally, Both corroborate their peculiar mode of life with a dualistic view of the relation of the spirit and matter, good and evil. (19) Both agree especially in their notions about the origin of the soul, its relationship to the body, and about a future life, only the doctrine of transmigration of souls seems not to have been known among the Essenes”[3] [[16]]
Striking as these resemblances may appear, it will be seen on a closer examination that some of the points which constitute this comparison do not exist in Essenism, that others are either due to the coloring of Josephus or have their origin in Judaism, that the difference between Pythagorism and Essenism are far more numerous and vital than the parallels, and that Zeller’s conclusion is therefore not warranted. I shall examine these points seriatim.
(1) Asceticism is not foreign to Judaism. We meet with individuals who voluntarily imposed upon themselves ascetic life to be able, as they thought, to give themselves more entirely to the service of God by mortifying the lusts of the flesh, at a very early period of Biblical history; and we need only to refer to the regulations about Nazarites ( Numb. vi. 1–21 ), to the case of Manoah and his wife ( Judg. xiii .), to the life of Elijah ( 1 Kings xviii.–xix. ) to the practices of the Rechabites throughout the Scriptures, of persons abstaining from the good things of this world, to see how the Essenes, without ( Jer. xxxv. 2 , &c.), and to the numerous instances which occur copying the Pythagoreans or any other heathen fraternity, would naturally conclude that asceticism is conducive to a devotional life. (2) As to the repudiation of animal sacrifice, animal food, wine, &c, to which Zeller refers in the second point of comparison, I submit that the Essenes did not repudiate animal sacrifices, but that they could not offer them on account of the different view which they had about holiness, as Josephus most distinctly declares (vide infra p. 52), that neither Philo nor Josephus says a word about their objecting to eat animal flesh or drink wine, and that their celibacy arose from an extension of a law contained in the Pentateuch. Besides, it is not quite so certain that the Pythagoreans did not offer animal sacrifices; Diogenes Laertius and others positively state that Pythagoras himself sacrificed a hecatomb upon his discovering what is called the [[17]]Pythagoric theorem, i.e. that, in a right angled triangle, the square of the hypothenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the sides.[4] (4) The fourth comparison about simplicity of life is involved in the first. (5) The statement in the fifth comparison, that the Essenes refrain from warm baths, is purely imaginary; (6, 7) whilst the white garments and the purifications mentioned in the sixth and seventh parallels are strictly Jewish and Biblical. As symbolic of purity the priests were required to clothe themselves in white linen ( Exod. xxviii. 39–42 ; Levit. vi. 10 ; xvi. 4 ), and the saints in heaven, washed and cleansed from all impurity, are to be clad in white garments ( 4 Esdras ii. 39–45 ; Enoch lxi. 18 ; Rev. iii. 4 ; vi. 11 ; vii. 9, 14 ; xix. 8 ); soiled garments are regarded as emblematic of impurity ( Zech. iii. 3 , &c.) Inseparably connected therewith are the frequent purifications or washings enjoined on the priests before entering into the presence of God to perform religious acts ( Levit. xvi. 4 ; 2 Chron. xxx. 19 ), and on the people generally after coming in contact with anything impure ( Levit. xi. 25, 40 ; xv. 5–24 ). The white garments and the frequent purifications of the Essenes, who strove to live after the highest degree of Levitical purity, were therefore in perfect harmony with exaggerated Judaism. (8) As to the assertion in comparison 8 that the Pythagoreans prohibited oaths, it is well known that they did use oaths on important occasions, and that they held it to be most sacred to swear by the number four, which they represented by ten dots in the form of a triangle, so that each side consisted of four dots, as follows:—
•
• •
• • •
• • • • [[18]]
The community of goods, the secresy about their institutions, the symbolic representation of their doctrines, &c., mentioned in comparisons 9, 10, 11, 12, are the natural result of their manner of life. (13) That they worshipped the sun is not borne out by fact, (14) whilst their peculiar manner in performing the functions of nature is in accordance with the injunction of Scripture ( Deut. xxiii. 13, 15 ), which the Essenes, as the spiritual host of the Lord, applied to themselves. (15) As to their very peculiar belief in intermediate beings between the Deity and the world, mentioned in the fifteenth point of comparison, I can only say that Philo and Josephus say nothing about it. (16) Their devotedness to the study of the magic arts was restricted to miraculous cures, and was not peculiar to them; since tradition had made Solomon the author of books on magical cures and exorcisms, and Josephus tells us (vide infra, p. 44, note 35) that he had seen other Jews performing these magic cures. (17) Neither is there anything foreign in the opinion, that the power to foretel future events can only be obtained by leading a life of preeminent holiness, for this was the common belief of the Jews, though it is true that the Essenes were the only section of the Jewish community who as a body strove to obtain the gift of prophecy. It, however, must not be forgotten that others too laid claim to this gift. Josephus tells us that when brought as prisoner of war before Vespasian, he addressed the Roman general as follows:—“Thou, Vespasian thinkest that thou hast simply a prisoner of war in me, but I appear before thee as a prophet of important future events. If I had not to deliver to thee a message from God, I would have known what the Jewish law demands, and how a general ought to die. Dost thou want to send me to Nero? For what? Will his successors, who ascend the throne before thee, reign [[19]]long on it? No! thou, Vespasian, wilt be emperor and autocrat—thou, and this thy son.” (Jewish War, iii. 8, § 9). This prophecy of Josephus is also recorded by the celebrated Roman historian Dion Cassius who says: “Josephus, a Jew, was taken prisoner by him (i.e. Vespasian), and put in chains; but he smilingly addressed him: ‘Thou puttest me now in chains, but thou wilt loose them again, after twelve months, as emperor’ ” (lib. lxvi. c. 1); and by Tacitus (lib. v. c. 13). What Zeller says in comparisons 18 and 19 about their dualistic view of the relationship of spirit and matter, good and evil, and their notions of the origin of the soul, is entirely owing to Josephus’ colouring of the subject, as may be seen from the notes on the extracts from this historian in the second part of this Essay.
Having thus shown that the parallels between Pythagorism and Essenism are more imaginary than real, and that the few things which might be considered as being analogous are unimportant, and are such as will naturally develop themselves among any number of enlightened men who devote themselves almost exclusively to a contemplative religious life, I shall now point out some of the vital differences between the two brotherhoods. 1. The Pythagoreans were essentially polytheists; the Essenes were real monotheistic Jews, worshippers of the Holy One of Israel. 2. The Pythagoreans clustered round Pythagoras as the centre of their spiritual and intellectual life, and estimated the degree of perfection of any of the members by the degree of intimacy which he enjoyed with Pythagoras: the Essenes regarded the inspired Scriptures as their sole source of spiritual life, and called no man master on earth, every one having the same right to teach, and being alike eligible for all the offices in the commonwealth. 3. The Pythagoreans favored matrimony, and we are told that Pythagoras himself had a wife and children; whilst celibacy was the rule of [[20]]Essenism, marriage being the exception. 4. The Pythagoreans believed in the doctrine of metempsychosis, which led them to abstain from eating animal flesh, because human souls migrated into animals, and made Pythagoras once intercede in behalf of a dog that was being beaten, because he recognised in its cries the voice of a departed friend: the Essenes believed no such thing. 5. Scientific studies, such as mathematics, astronomy, music, &c, formed an essential part of the Pythagorean system: Essenism strictly forbade these studies as injurious to a devotional life. 6. Pythagorism was occupied with instigating the problems of the origin and constitution of the universe: Essenism regarded such inquiries as impious, and most implicitly looked upon God as the creator of all things. 7. Pythagorism taught that man can control his fortune and overrule his circumstances: Essenism maintained that fate governs all things, and that nothing can befal man contrary to its determination and will. 8. Pythagorism enjoined ointment to be used by its followers: the Essenes regarded it as defilement 9. The Pythagoreans had a sovereign contempt for all those who did not belong to their ranks: the Essenes were most exemplary in their charity towards all men, and in their unbounded kindness to those who were not of the brotherhood. 10. The Pythagoreans were an aristocratical and exclusive club, and excited the jealousy and hatred not only of the democratical party in Crotona, but also of a considerable number of the opposite faction, so much so that it speedily led to their destruction: the Essenes were meek and lowly in spirit, and were so much beloved by those who belonged to different sects, that Pharisees and Sadducees, Greeks and Romans, Jews and Gentiles, joined in lavishing the highest praise upon them.[5] [[21]]