Karaites and Rabbanites: Eternal Dualism

The concept of dualism is integral to Judaism though at first one might not recognize how essential it has been and currently is. From the earliest times, dualism has always been an present as part of Judaism and in most cases these pairs have been antagonistic towards each other. From its inception we see the twinning of Moses's pysche between that of Egyptian Prince and Hebrew exile. His division of state and religion between himself and Aaron. Down to the division of Canaan when the tribes were split between allegiance to either Ephraim or Judah, which later manifested as the northern Kingdom of Israel and the southern Kingdom of Judah. Whereas the north was more integrated into world politics and economics, the south was actually more backward and isolationist. Everything was reproduced in duplicate from two royal houses to two temples and two priesthoods. And even more so in the southern Kingdom which was ruled in tandem, by a royal descendant of the House of David and a priest from the House of Zadok, each having vetoing powers over the other. When the exiles returned from Persia, the House of David no longer had any genuine authority and in order to fill this vacuum there arose a group that referred to themselves as the people’s representatives and they became the Yin to the Priesthood’s Yang and vice versa. When the Maccabees upset this relationship and assumed both Kingly and Priestly duties, they had temporarily eliminated the dualism and their Hasidic supporters quickly restored that imbalance by forming the Pharisee movement which was anti-Hasmonean (Maccabean) to encourage the separation of the Judean State from it Seleukid Greek overlords. In other words they sought to revive the isolationist policies of the earlier Kingdom even though this was impossible as the world had become a much smaller place. This eventually manifested itself into to political parties, that being the Sadducees representing the Hasmoneans and Priesthood and the Pharisees, supposedly representing the people.




But after 1300 years of established dogma, the task before the Pharisees was insurmountable as long as the people held on to the traditional ways. Therefore it was necessary for the Pharisees to reinvent the 'religious wheel' if they were to wean the people off the past. With their entire focus on being ways in which to diminish the priestly authority and check their privileges, it meant eliminating anything in the religious doctrines that supported the priests in their recognition of being a separate and aristocratic class. First to go were personal purity and sanctity, which were attributes of the priests but not the common people. By adopting the same purity and sanctity rituals, the Pharisees were claiming to be as holy as the priests and in some ways holier by claiming to be more strict in their observance. Of course they overlooked the fact that priestly sanctity and recognition was ordained by God in the Torah and they had no such claim but that wasn’t about to stop them in their efforts to seize power. Whereas manhy of the dietary laws were restricted to the priests which in turn released the people from the heavy burden of adhering to them in a world that did not recognize such laws, the Pharisees insisted that all the people must follow all of the dietary laws as well, thereby claiming the Priests have been relieved of that burden and were no longer necessary for that purpose. They had been made redundant.

In so doing, the Pharisees also ensured that there would never be acceptance of the Samaritans within the fold of a greater Judaism which unification had been gaining momentum since their priesthood was as pure if not purer than that of the Jerusalem priesthood and their Temple on Mount Gerzim was just as sanctified by the ancient traditions. The Samaritans who stood for priestly prerogative and strict adherence to the Torah naturally allied themselves with the Sadducees within this dualistic framework.

With the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD the feuding continued in the form of two schools of teaching. Oddly, the Pharisees viewed the destruction of the Temple as a victory. They claimed it was vindication of their belief in the ‘evil’ of the priesthood and the negation of the effect that the Temple had over the minds and hearts of the people now made them susceptible to their teachings. It is ironic that their Rabbinic descendants now mourn over the loss of the Temple and talk of its restoration for the coming of the messianic age even thought such events would once again mean that they would be stripped of the power and authority that they had fought so zealously for. Of the two schools that developed, one was the school of Shammai and was represented by the teachings of Eliezer ben Hyracanus and Jose the Galilean. They called for adherence to the law as it was before the establishment of the Pharisees, demonstrating that even with the loss of the Temple there was no need for change. The other school was that established by Hillel, the champion of Pharisaism and the man that began the systematization of an entirely new body of laws. The Pharisees of the school of Hillel strove to exclude and annul the laws that had any Sadducee overtones. There was a wholesale rewriting of all the laws into what became the Talmud. Many of these obvious alterations can be found when one reads intact original documents prior to the Pharisees making their alterations such as in Greek versions of the scriptures, Aramaic versions and the text known as Pseudo-Jonathan.

But not only can the early Sadducee laws be recovered through reconstruction of these early texts but it can also be demonstrated that the laws as practice by the Karaites are a preservation of this original Halachah and therefore the ancient dualism is alive and well under the Rabbanite versus Karaite beliefs. Therefore Karaism should not be looked upon as a recent manifestation of a revolt against Rabbanism but as the genuine article; the once original beliefs and practices of the Jews as they were intended to be against those that purposely altered them. It should be obvious therefore, that the initial claims by the Pharisees that the old laws were only self-serving on behalf of the priesthood so that they could maintain an aristocratic lifestyle to the detriment of the people were completely false since there is no such aristocracy living off the suffering of the multitude now, and Karaism as a viable and practiced religion still exists. Therefore any Rabbinical argument that supports the ancient Pharisaic claim is just as false and just as hypocritical in its masking of the truth that the entire accusation was nothing more than an attempt to seize power from where it properly rested as ordained by God.

Dualism is obviously a fact of life in Judaism. It has existed from the creation of the people up to and including present days. Philosophically, it was essential for the cultural development of the people and may in many ways explain why of all the ancient peoples and religions, Jews have been the most successful in surviving all the adversities that the world has shunted their way. By having this seesaw balance between political and religious factions, it has similarly swayed and maneuvered the minefield of religious and cultural intolerance with one sect dominant while the other is in remission and then when circumstances changed the balance may have similarly shifted with a reversal of roles. So in fact what might at first appear to be detrimental has been a very successful survival mechanism? With the reestablishment of Israel, perhaps the seesaw once again is shifting and we will see a rise in Karaism with an accompanying intellectual growth that rivals the period of Karaite flourishing experienced during the Muslim Golden Age?

The Karaite Schism

Over the years I have been accused countless times of belonging to what mainstream Judaism considers a heretic sect. From being called “Aher” or 'the other', to having my knuckles rapped with a yardstick by the Rabbis that taught me for having dissenting opinions and contrary beliefs. It’s not easy to accept being outside the mainstream and being punished for being so. But that has been the history of the relationship between Karaites and Rabbanites for over a millennia now. The former punished by the latter for holding heretical beliefs. And I thought long and hard about that history and the long held accusation that we were heretics and therefore labeled for an eternity. What is a heretic? By definition it is one who espouses unorthordox religious doctrines. A misbeliever, religious outcast who holds beliefs in conflict with traditional religious dogma. Upon reflection it became clear to me that we were not the heretics at all. By definition it was Rabbinical Judaism that was guilty of that role. And that is the irony of the situation for when we examine the schism between Karaite and Rabbanite Judaism, there has always been promulgated this major assumption that Karaites were the sect which broke away from mainstream Judaism but this misinformed concept just happens to be the one widely expounded by Rabbinical Judaism. Of course we’d be the heretics as they rewrote the history because to admit the truth would necessitate that they also admit the lie.




In the Beginning
Since the role of the Kahana is to ‘restore’ then it is my family responsibility to correct this falsehood if possible by providing you, the reader with enough information to draw your own conclusions. That after all is the primary premise of Anan ben David’s teachings. ‘To draw truths from reading for yourself.’ But in order that you are informed, it necessitates that you understand where it all began. Everything has a beginning, even the schism. After the return from Persian exile in the fifth century BC the power structure in Judea lay in the hands of the priesthood. It was an uneasy balance since for the first time, the powers that be recognized we could not live in isolation from the rest of the world but must strive for a careful balance between self-rule and being a satrap for much greater powers that dictated laws on the scale of world empires. But under this theocracy there was a growing undercurrent for religious and political democracy as the youth of subsequent generations dreamt of freedom and independence outside Empirical governance. But as long as at the head of the nation stood the high-priest, a descendant of the family of Zadok there would be no monarchy that was the symbol of an independent kingdom. For all intents, the family of the high priest now represented the nobility of the nation and exerted control over both the secular and religious lives of the people but because they weren’t kings themselves they could swear allegiance to their Persian and subsequent Seleukid masters without fear of abandoning God.

Growing Dissent
This relationship of a subservient Judean province would never satisfy those restless for independence and dreaming of a Kingdom of God where His was the chosen nation to the exclusion of all others; that element in society wishing to obtain power for themselves and therefore accusing the priestly ruling class of ignoring the needs of the common people. They were agitators, activists, rebels and worst of all from an educated class that were opposed to hereditary recognition since that would exclude themselves from ever holding power. Whereas the high priesthood preserved the ancient laws, customs and observances, not permitting modification with changing times, their detractors claimed them to be out of touch with the political environment of the world as a whole, willingly bending their knees to foreign kings that were pagans and therefore the enemies of God. These adversaries found the priests to be easy targets amongst the youth and hotheads of a nation by showing that the governing class had allied themselves with the Syrian-Greeks and were adopting some of the disgusting habits of the Greek culture. This latter accusation didn’t need to be anything more than demonstrating that the priests were making daily sacrifices on behalf of the Empire. As paradoxical and nonsensical as it would be to be accused of both remaining static and unchanging, as well as guilty of adopting foreign culture at the same time, nonetheless these were the charges leveled against them by this new radical class of Judean society and like so many other ridiculous claims made by those wishing to change societies, the more unfounded and absurd the claim, the more accepted it becomes by the masses. Not unlike the Nazi claims of Jews of being both the leaders and perpetrators of Communism but at the same time heading up all the financial banks and industries of the world thereby being the evil controlling financial industrialists keeping the people in poverty. When one thinks about it these claims are mutually exclusive but to the ignorant masses it was the fuel that ignited the holocaust.

Rise of the Pharisees
With the victory by the Maccabees over the Seleukids, the government passed from the hands of the select priestly families to the Asmoneans, a lesser Aaronic family, and therefore much to the chagrin of the priestly detractors that had hope for a wholesale change. Considering these others had comprised a large portion of the Hasidim, allies to the Asmoneans, they felt they were entitled to share in that power if not assume it completely. But the Maccabees had their own agenda and not only did they assume the high priesthood they declared themselves to be Kings, which was totally unacceptable by everyone. Especially when as Kings they swore allegiance back to the Seleukid Empire they had won their independence against. When the sharing of power failed to occur with the radical educated class, these rebels renamed themselves the Perushim (Pharisees), or what we would understand at the ‘separated’ since they considered themselves to be separate from the rest of the world, separate from the Asmoneans whom they now considered enemies, and desirous to enhance that separation by severing all ties to the Empire. These Pharisees were now against any power being centralized within the priesthood and were determined to end this arrangement which was dictated in the Torah. Key amongst the Pharisees beliefs was that personal purity and sanctity amongst the people outranked that of the priesthood. A concept totally in defiance to the rules passed down by God to Moses. They began claiming that there existed an oral set of laws that overruled much of the Torah which had only concentrated on the Priestly requirements. This oral set of laws was the one intended for the common people. For example, no longer were the laws of purity and food only stringently required for the priests to follow, as these were initially imposed in order to free the people of the burden to do so, but now they must be performed by the common people. In essence, the Pharisees expanded the laws, or essentially rewrote themselves into the laws so that they could claim a role in the governance of what had been a theocracy and ‘bring power to the people.’ Of course this really wasn’t about power to the people but about power to the rabbis as they would tell the people what was best for them.




Pharisees Become the Rabbanites
Once the temple was destroyed the Pharisees laid claim to being the only governing body in Israel and immediately rejected all the traditions that had been preserved as priestly rights. One must look upon this event and wonder just how much of the Temple’s destruction was being orchestrated by the Pharisee Rabbis. After all, as long as the Temple existed the priests would still hold the majority of the power and the hearts and the allegiance of the majority of the people. Examining the historical records and seeing where the support came for such rebels as Simon ben Gioras and John of Gischala, the two men ultimately responsible for the Temple’s destruction by using it as a fortress to fight the Romans, the fingers do point at these Pharasaic leaders. Destroying the Temple gave them the opportunity to remove the seat of power from Jerusalem and centre it at Jamniah under their own leader Rabbi Jonathan ben Zakkai, whom just happened to sneak himself out of Jerusalem in a coffin before its final destruction. One must wonder what his role in the entire revolt had been before he made the decision to flee for his life.

This new Rabbanite school in Jamniah did not sit well with everyone, and the school of Shammai still clung to the old traditions feeling that to abandon them would be a betrayal of the Torah. But the school of Hillel was quick to disagree, not only emphasizing the great victory of the Pharisees but began to establish an entire new systemization of laws. It was not entirely unexpected when a descendant of Hillel, then claimed the title of being Prince of Israel. The Pharisees had attained what they had wanted from the beginning; power. The school of Hillel zealously rewrote the laws to exclude and eliminate any of the traditions that had been exclusive to the Sadducees and even rewrote some of the scriptural texts to remove the original priestly functions. Fortunately, those that refused to abandon the Sadducean ways, preserved these as the Zadokites and Boethians, and eventually as part of Karaite traditions.


The Talmud Changed the Original Laws
Fortunately some texts explaining early traditions still exist, such as Philo of Alexandria’s commentaries. Philo living in the first century while the Temple still existed provides us with an insight into how Judaism used to be before the Pharisees and their descendants the Rabbanites changed them. For example, the first day of the seventh month called Tishrei, was the Day of Trumpets, as trumpets are to be blown that day at the offering of the sacrifices. Their sounding is a commemoration of the giving of the Law. Yom Teruah was a day to make loud noises or praises. This can be done by the blowing of any instrument even the human voice. There was never any previous custom of referring to the first day of Tishrei as the New Year and making it sacred in that respect. Considering it was the seventh month, it could hardly be the New Year and since most cultures view the end of winter and start of spring as being the start of the year, choosing the start of autumn by the Rabbis to call the New Year hardly makes any sense at all. So why do it? Well if we accept the story handed down in by my relatives it has to do with the fall of the Temple on the 9th of Av, a month and a half earlier. With the destruction of the Temple, the Rabbis were given a new life, power and authority that they couldn't achieve with a strong priesthood. So after a month of mourning the loss of the Temple they wanted to celebrate their new beginning. So in essence, not the celebratio of a New Year but the celebration of a New Beginning, the dawn of the age of Rabbis. Essentially, they created a holy day for self glorification.

The list of laws that Philo expounds is exhaustive but in almost each case it is in line with Karaite laws and traditions. Since Philo predates the Talmud, then it can only be assumed that the Talmud has not interpreted the old traditions but actually invented new ones. One has to ask then, why if these old laws and requirements were known did those writing the Talmud purposely alter the belief and traditional structure. The common Rabbinical excuse is that after the destruction of the Temple, the old laws were lost and there was a cultural amnesia that took hold requiring the Rabbis to reinterpret the entire body of Halachah (Laws). It is even said that Philo’s works had been lost and unavailable until discovered by Azariah dei Rossi at the end of the sixteenth century. One might be willing to grant them this excuse if it wasn’t for the fact that the Karaite scholar Kirkisani makes reference to the works of the Alexandrine and how they were eagerly studied in the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries. One can safely assume that Philo’s works were always available but purposely avoided by the Rabbanites because if they were to be made publicly known then the general Jewish population would recognize that they had been deceived into following new traditions that were in conflict with those given to the people by Moses. So it was never the Karaites that were the heretics but instead the Rabbanites that altered, transformed, obliterated, and purposely forgot the old traditions in order to cement their rise to power.