Part Two

p. 122 up with another. It is difficult enough to know whether chondros is a kind of barley, or spelt, a kind of wheat, or brassica is a kind of cabbage; to study the powers of their roots and how far they spread in the ground; how much of it remains for the following year, and how much does not remain; how much space and time is to be left between each species. Further, the distinction of the various species of animals served various purposes, among which is to know which communicates poison and which not. With this is connected the knowledge of injuries which make an animal unlawful for food. This is even more profound than what Aristotle wrote on the subject, viz. how to know which injuries are fatal and thus to deter people from eating carrion. The small remnant of this knowledge which has remained makes us wonder. Add to this the acquaintance with the blemishes which disqualify priests from taking part in the Temple service, as well as of the blemishes which prohibit the offering up of certain animals as sacrifices. Then there is the knowledge of the various kinds of issue and of the period of purification. All this requires instruction. Man is not able to determine these matters by reflection alone, without divine assistance. The same is the case with the knowledge of the revolutions of the spheres, of which the yearly calendar is but one fruit. The excellence of the calculation of the calendar is famous, and it is well known what deep root it has taken among these people, few in number, yet excellently equipped with model institutions. Could it be otherwise? On account of the smallness, humbleness, and dispersion of the people it is hardly noticed among the other nations, yet those relics of the Divine made it into one firmly established organization.

p. 123 [paragraph continues] The calendar, based on the rules of the revolution of the moon, as handed down by the House of David, is truly wonderful. Though hundreds of years have passed, no mistake has been found in it, whilst the observations of Greek and other astronomers are not faultless. They were obliged to insert corrections and supplements every century, whilst our calendar is always free from error, as it rests on prophetic tradition. Had there been the smallest flaw in a fundamental rule this would to-day have assumed serious proportions, on account of the time difference between the conjunction of the moon and the moment when she becomes visible. In the same manner our sages were, without doubt, acquainted with the movements of the sun and astronomy in general. Music was the pride of a nation which distributed their songs in such a way that they fell to the lot of the aristocracy of the people, viz. the Levites, who made practical use of them in the holy house and in the holy season. For their maintenance they were satisfied with the tithes, as they had no occupation but music. As an art it is highly esteemed among mankind, as long as it is not abused and degraded, and as long as the people preserves its original nobleness and purity. David and Samuel were its great masters. Dost thou think that they understood it well or not? 65. Al Khazari: There can be no doubt that their art was most perfect, and touched the souls, as people say that it changes the humour of a man's soul to a different one. It is impossible that it should now reach the same high level. It has deteriorated, and servants and half-crazy people are its patrons. Truly, Rabbi, it sank from its greatness, as you have sunk in spite of your former greatness.

p. 124 66. The Rabbi: What is thy opinion of Solomon's accomplishments? Did he not, with the assistance of divine, intellectual, and natural power, converse on all sciences? The inhabitants of the earth travelled to him, in order to carry forth his learning, even as far as India. Now the roots and principles of all sciences were handed down from us first to the Chaldaeans, then to the Persians and Medians, then to Greece, and finally to the Romans. On account of the length of this period, and the many disturbing circumstances, it was forgotten that they had originated with the Hebrews, and so they were ascribed to the Greeks and Romans. To Hebrew, however, belongs the first place, both as regards the nature of the languages, and as to fullness of meanings. 67. Al-Khazari: Is Hebrew superior to other languages? Do we not see distinctly that the latter are more finished and comprehensive? 68. The Rabbi: It shared the fate of its bearers, degenerating and dwindling with them. Considered historically and logically, its original form is the noblest. According to tradition it is the language in which God spoke to Adam and Eve, and in which the latter conversed. It is proved by the derivation of Adam from adāmāh, ishshāh from ish; ḥayyāh from ḥayy; Cain from qānīthī; Shēth from shāth, and Noah from yenaḥ, mēnū. This is supported by the evidence of the Tōrāh. The whole is traced back to Eber, Noah and Adam. It is the language of Eber after whom it was called Hebrew, because after the confusion of tongues it was he who retained it. Abraham was an Aramaean of Ur Kasdim, because the language of the Chaldaeans was Aramaic. He employed Hebrew as a specially holy language and

p. 125 [paragraph continues] Aramaic for everyday use. For this reason Ishmael brought it to the Arabic speaking nations, and the consequence was that Aramaic, Arabic and Hebrew are similar to each other in their vocabulary, grammatical rules, and formations. The superiority of Hebrew is manifest from the logical point of view if we consider the people who employed it for discourses, particularly at the time when prophecy was rife among them, also for preaching, songs and psalmody. It is conceivable that their rulers such as for instance, Moses, Joshua, David, and Solomon lacked the words to express what they wished, as it is the case with us to-day, because it is lost to us? Dost thou not see how the Tōrāh, when describing the Tabernacle, Ephōd and breastplate and other objects, always finds the most suitable word for all these strange matters? How beautifully is this description composed? It is just the same with the names of people, species of birds and stones, the diction of David's Psalms, the lamentations of Job, and his dispute with his friends, the addresses of Isaiah, etc. 69. Al-Khazari: Thou wilt only succeed in placing it on a par with other languages thus. But where is its pre-eminence? Other languages surpass it in songs metrically constructed and arranged for tunes 41 70. The Rabbi: It is obvious that a tune is independent of the metre, or of the lesser or greater number of syllables. The verse hōdū la’dōnāi ki tōb can, therefore, be sung to the same tune as leōsē niflāōth gedōlōth lebaddō. This is the rule in sentences in which the tune must follow the grammatical construction. Rhymed poems, however, which are recited, and in which a good metre is noticeable, are neglected for something higher and more useful.

p. 126 71. Al-Khazari: And what may that be? 72. The Rabbi: The faculty of speech is to transmit the idea of the speaker into the soul of the hearer. Such intention, however, can only be carried out to perfection by means of oral communication. This is better than writing. The proverb is: 'From the mouths of scholars, but not from the mouth of books.' Verbal communication finds various aids either in pausing or continuing to speak, according to the requirements of the sentence, by raising or lowering the voice, in expressing astonishment, question, narrative, desire, fear or submission by means of gestures, without which speech by itself would remain inadequate. Occasionally the speaker even has recourse to movements of eyes, eyebrows, or the whole head and hands, in order to express anger, pleasure, humility or haughtiness to the degree desired. In the remnant of our language which was created and instituted by God, are implanted subtle elements calculated to promote understanding, and to take the place of the above aids to speech. These are the accents with which the holy text is read. They denote pause and continuation, they separate question from answer, the beginning from the continuation of the speech, haste from hesitation, command from request, on which subject books might be written. He who intends to do this must omit poetry, because it can only be recited in one way. For it mostly connects when it should stop and stops where it should go on. One cannot avoid this except with great trouble.

73. Al-Khazari: It is but proper that mere beauty of sound should yield to lucidity of speech. Harmony pleases the ear, but exactness makes the meaning clear. I see, however, that you Jews long for a prosody, in p. 127 imitation of other peoples, in order to force the Hebrew language into their metres. 74. The Rabbi: This is because we remained and are froward. Instead of being satisfied with the superiority mentioned above, we corrupted the structure of our language, which is built on harmony, and created discord. 75. Al-Khazari: How so? 76. The Rabbi: Didst thou not see that a hundred persons read the Tōrāh as one person, stopping in one moment, and continuing simultaneously? 77. Al-Khazari I have, indeed, observed this, and never saw the like of it either among Persians or Arabs. It is impossible in the recitation of a poem. Now I should like to know how the Hebrew language obtained that advantage, and how the metre interferes with it. 78. The Rabbi: The reason is that you can put together two [vowelless] consonants, but not three vowels, except in rare cases This not only gives the speech a rest, but enables it to obtain that advantage, viz. consonance and fluency in reading. This makes learning by heart and the grasping of the meaning easy. The first thing which destroys metrical reading is the relation of those two consonants. Correct accentuation becomes impossible, so that ŏkhlāh (food) is read like ōkhelāh (she is eating); ŏmrō (his word) and āmerū (they have spoken) have metrically the same value as ōmēr (speaking) and ōmer (word). Thus also the time difference between shábti, which is past tense, and we shabtí, which is future, lost. We might find a way out of this difficulty if we followed the ways of the Piyyūt which does not interfere with the language,

p. 128 and merely employs the rhyme. But in matters of poetry, the same befell us which befell our forefathers, concerning whom it is written: 'They mingled among the gentiles and learned their works '(Ps. cvi. 35). 79. Al-Khazari: I should like to ask whether thou knowest the reason why Jews move to and fro when reading the Bible? 80. The Rabbi: It is said that it is done in order to arouse natural heat. My personal belief is that it stands in connexion with the subject under discussion. As it often happened that many persons read at the same time, it was possible that ten or more read from one volume. This is the reason why our books are so large. Each of them was obliged to bend down in his turn in order to read a passage, and to turn back again. This resulted in a continual bending and sitting up, the book lying on the ground. This was one reason. Then it became a habit through constant seeing, observing and imitating, which is in man's nature. Other people read each out of his own book, either bringing it near to his eyes, or, if he pleased, bending down to it without inconveniencing his neighbour. There was, therefore, no necessity of bending and sitting up. We will now discuss the importance of the accents, the orthographic value of the seven principal vowel signs, the grammatical accuracy resulting from them as well as from the distinction between Qāmeṣ, Pataḥ, Ṣērē and Sēgōl. They influence the meaning of grammatical forms and assist in distinguishing between past and future tenses e.g., ‏שַׁמתִּי‎ and ‏ושַׁמְתִּי‎ and ‏וַאֲבָרְכֵהוּ‎ and ‏וְאַבָרְכֵהוּ‎. (Is. li. 2, and Gen. xxvii, 33); or between a verb and an adjective, e.g. ‏חָבַם‎ and ‏חָבָם‎; between the interrogative Hē and the article, as in ‏הָעוֹלָה הִיא לִמָעְלָה‎

p. 129 [paragraph continues] (Eccl. iii. 21), and other cases. The euphony and structure of speech is increased by the sequence of two vowelless consonants, which enables a whole congregation to read Hebrew simultaneously without mistakes. Other rules apply to the musical accents. For the vowel sounds are divided in Hebrew into three classes, viz. U-sound, A-sound, and I-sound; or in another division: great U-sound, or Qāmeṣ, medium U-sound, or Ḥōlem; little U-sound, or Shūreq; great A-sound, or Pataḥ; little A-sound or Sēgōl; great I-sound or Sērē; little I-sound, or Ḥīreq. Shewā is sounded with all these [vowels] under certain conditions. It is vowel absolute, because any addition would require a vowelless consonant to follow. Qāmeṣ is followed by a long closed syllable, but not by dāgēsh in the first form Dagēsh can only follow, if demanded by the exigencies of the second or third forms, the syllable being long, by one of the vowel letters alef or hē, as in ‏ברא‎ and ‏קנה‎. A syllable of this kind can also end in a vowelless consonant, as in ‏קאם‎ (Hos. x. 14). Ḥōlem also can be followed by a vowel letter which is wāw or alef as in ‏לא‎ and ‏לו‎, or a syllable of this kind can be closed by a consonant as ‏שׁור‎ and ‏שׂמׂאל‎. The vowel letters after Ṣērē are alef or yōd as in ‏יוצא‎ and ‏יוצאי‎. Hē, however, only in the second form, but not in the first. Shūreq is free for all three forms. It can be followed by a vowel letter, or dāgēsh, or vowelless consonant. Its long vowel is expressed by wāw only as, ‏לו‎, ‏ללון‎ and ‏לֻקח‎. Ḥīreq follows the rule of Shūreq as in ‏לין‎, ‏לי‎ and ‏לבי‎. Pataḥ, and Sēgōl are not followed by a vowel letter in the first form, but are lengthened by the second form, either for the sake of emphasis, or on account of the accent, or in the pause

p. 130 at the end of a sentence. The rules of the first form are obtained by considering the formation of each word separately, without any relation to the construction of the sentence with its variety of combination and separation, and long and short words. Then are obtained the seven principal vowels in their original, unchanged form and the simple Shewā without qa’yā. The second form deals with euphony in the construction of sentences. Occasionally elements of the first form are altered to please the second. The third form concerns the accents, and sometimes reacts on both preceding ones. In the first form three consecutive vowels without an intervening consonant or dāgesh are possible, but three, or more, short vowels may follow each other as in Arabic. This, however, is impossible in the second form. As soon as three vowels follow each other in the first form, the second one lengthens one of them to the quantity of a long vowel as in ‏משבָני‎, ‏לשבֵני‎, ‏רצפת‎ (Ps. xxxi. 12; Esth. i. 6). For Hebrew does not allow three consecutive vowels, except when a consonant is either repeated as in ‏שררך‎ (Cant. vii. 3), or in the case of gutturals as in ‏נהרי‎ and ‏נחלי‎, the reader being at liberty to read [the first syllable] long or short. In the same way the first form allows the sequence of two long closed syllables. The second form, however, to prevent clumsiness of speech, shortens one long syllable as in ‏שמתי‎ and ‏ושמתי‎. It is obvious that the pronunciation of ‏פעל‎ and similar forms is contrary to its vocalisation, the second syllable being lengthened in spite of the Pataḥ, whilst the first is read short in spite of the Qāmeṣ. The heightening of the second syllable is due to the tone, but not to make it slightly longer. Words as ‏אמר-לי‎ and ‏עשה-לי‎ (Gen. xx. 5; xxi. 6)

p. 131 remain therefore in the first form, because the smaller word has the tone. We also find ‏פָעָל‎ with two Qāmeṣ though in the past tense. The cause of this is to be found in the athnaḥ or sōf pāsūq, and we say that this is possible in the second form on account of the pause. We follow this up till we find even ‏פָעָל‎ with two Qāmeṣ and zāqēf. The reason of this we find in a virtual pause, the word being entitled to athnaḥ or sōf pāsūq, but other cogent reasons made athnaḥ and sōf pāsūq in this case impossible. On the other hand we find these two accents with two pataḥs, however strange this may be, e.g. ‏ויאמַר‎, ‏וזקנתי‎, ‏ותשברנה‎, ‏וַיִּלַךָ‎. The reason of pataḥ in ‏ויאמר‎ is found in examining its meaning, as it cannot stand in pause, and is necessarily connected with the following complement of the sentence There are only a few exceptions as ‏כאשר אָמָר‎, (Gen. xxi. 1), because the verb completes the sentence logically, and can take Qāmeṣ because of the pause. As regards, however, ‏וילך‎ and ‏ותשברנה‎, they should originally be ‏ויֵלֵך‎ and ‏ותשבֵרנה‎; but the transformation of the I-sound with great Pataḥ, without any intermediate element, was too awkward, and therefore Pataḥ stepped in. The form ‏זקנתי‎ belongs probably to the same class, because the root is ‏זָקֵן‎, the Ṣērē being changed into Pataḥ at the end of a sentence. We marvel why the ‏פֶעֶל‎ forms have the accent on the first syllable which is read long, although it has Sēgōl. We must, however, consider that, if the first syllable remained short, Hebrew phonology would require the second syllable to be read long and with accent, and a slight quiescent would creep in between the second and third radicals. This would be inelegant, which is not the

p. 132 case in the first syllable, which must have this quiescent and has also room for it. This lengthening of the penultima corresponds to ‏פֶן עֶל‎, but not to ‏פָן עֱל‎. For when the word has athnaḥ, or sōf pāsūq, it is ‏פָעֶל‎ corresponding to ‏פָאן עֶל‎. This shows the necessity of lengthening the vowel in ‏שַמתי‎ and ‏שָמתי‎. We consider forms like ‏שער‎ and ‏נער‎ likewise strange, because the Pataḥ of the first syllable is read long. We soon discover, however, that they are ‏פֶעֶל‎ forms with Pataḥ on account of the guttural. For this reason they undergo no change in the status constructus, as do ‏נהר‎ and ‏קהל‎ (Gen. xv. 18; Exod. xii. 6), which are formed like ‏דָבָר‎. Then we find ‏אעשה‎, ‏יעשה‎, ‏אבנה‎ and ‏אקנה‎ with Sēgōl and vowel letters. If we consider the first instance, we find it to be a form ‏אפעל‎, ‏יפעל‎, the second radical not being long, but always forming a closed syllable with Pataḥ. We are now to read ‏אעשֶה‎ instead of Pataḥ, because no A-sound can precede a silent hē, unless it be Qāmeṣ. Qāmeṣ is long, whilst the second radical of a verb can never have a long vowel, except when read with a vowel, or when followed by Alef as in ‏אצֵא‎. It is for this reason that ‏אעשׂה‎ is read with Sēgōl which is the shortest vowel imaginable, but interchanges with Ṣērē when the second form requires to replace the one by the other at the ends of sentences. There is almost no necessity for the hē of ‏אעשה‎ except in the pause or with the accent, and is eased by dāgesh as in ‏אעשה-לך‎ and ‏אבנה-לי‎, (Exod. xxxiii. 5), in which cases the hē has no function. This is not the case [with ‏א‎] in ‏אצא‎, ‏אבא‎. In ‏בא-לי‎, there is no dāgesh, the ‏א‎ being preceded by Ṣērē and being a radical. Hē, however, is considered to be so weak that it is both graphically and phonetically

p. 133 omitted in ‏ויבן‎, ‏ויקן‎ and ‏ויעש‎. How could it, then, close a syllable vocalized by Ṣērē? It was, therefore, left to Sēgōl, the slightest vowel, at all events, in the first form. The second form changed it into Sērē, when standing in pause. It appears likewise strange that ‏מראה‎, ‏מעשה‎, ‏מקנה‎ and similar forms have Ṣērē in the construct state, but Sēgōl in the absolute. We should think the reverse to be correct. But if we consider that the third radical, viz. a silent Hē is treated as altogether absent, and those nouns have the forms of ‏מרא‎, ‏מעש‎, ‏מקן‎, nothing but Sēgōl will serve till some circumstances bring it out with a long vowel as in ‏מראֵה‎, ‏מעשֵה‎, ‏מראיהן‎ and ‏מעשיהן‎. Sēgōl becomes Ṣērē to take the place of [small] Pataḥ in ‏מראֵם‎ and ‏מעשׁםֵ‎. Words of the first form can be altered by the second as to the vowels, but not as to the pronunciation. The word ‏בן‎ has Sērē in the absolute state, Sēgōl in the construct. Occasionally the latter is lengthened by the tone as in ‏בן-יאיר‎ (Esth. ii. 5) with the Sēgōl of the first form In other cases the tone precipitates it, although it has Ṣērē according to the first form, as in ‏בן אחר‎ (Gen. xxx. 24). In segolate forms with the accent on the last syllable Sērē is no longer perplexing. The author of this profound science held secrets which are unknown to us. We may have discovered some by means of which he intended to stimulate our investigation as we have said above, with regard to ‏העולה היא למעלה‎. Or we might find out the rules of distinguishing between past and future, infinitive and participle of the passive voice, e.g. ‏נאסָף אל עמי‎ (Gen. xlix. 29), with Qāmeṣ, and ‏נאשר נאסַף‎ (Num. xxvii. 13) with Pataḥ. The masoretic text vocalizes three times ‏וישהָט‎ (Lev. viii. 15, 19, 23), with Qāmeṣ, although

p. 134 syntactically speaking the words stand only virtually in pause. There are many instances that the Sēgōl after Zarqā has the force of Athnaḥ, or sōf pāsūq, or Zākēf, causing an alteration of the first form. If I wished to enlarge an the subject, the book would become too lengthy. I only desired to give thee a taste of this profound study, which is not built on hap-hazard, but on fixed rules. 81. Al Khazari: This is sufficient to enlighten me on the wonderful character of the Hebrew language. Now I desire the description of a servant of God according to your conception. Afterwards I will ask thee for thy arguments against the Karaites. Then I should like to hear the principal articles of faith and religious axioms. Finally I wish to know which branches of ancient study have been preserved among you. Finished is the second part, and we begin --