The Young-students-library containing extracts and abridgments of the most valuable books printed in England, and in the forreign journals, from the year sixty five, to this time : to which is added a new essay upon all sorts of learning ... / by the Athenian Society ; also, a large alphabetical table, comprehending the contents of this volume, and of all the Athenian Mercuries and supplements, etc., printed in the year 1691.

A Discourse concerning the Original and Antiquity of the Hebrew Points, Vowels and Accents. The FIRST PART. (Book 1)

Containing the Discovery of the Improbability of their Novel and Humane Invention and Original. (Book 1)

CHAP. I. The Question stated. The Four different Opi∣nions about the First Period of Time where∣unto the Invention of the Points is assigned, are enumerated. The Three several Opinions of those who suppose the Points were a Novel Invention, related: The Two last examined.

THE Question under Consideration, is, Concerning the Time when the Shapes of the Points, Vowels and Ac∣cents were first invented, and placed to the Hebrew Bible.

There are Two periods of Time parti∣cularly fixed unto the one or the other, of which all Parties do in some respect ascribe their Original.

The one is, the Time of Ezra; the other is, A. D. 500. The one makes them of Divine the other of Humane Original and Authority.

So that the Question is, Whether the Shapes or Figures of the Points, Vowels and Accents which are joyned to the Text of the Hebrew Bible, were invented and placed to the Text as early as the time of Ezra, er else not until the Talmuds were finished, A. D. 500?

1. Those that place them to the First Period, viz. that say they were as ancient as the time of Ezra, are all the Jews, one (only Elias) excepted, though they differ as to the positive precise time of their first Invention, as R. Samuel Arkuvolti reckons them up. For, 1st. Some say they are coae∣vous with the Letters. 2. Others, That they were given to Moses on Sinai with the Oral Law, and kept by Tradition till Ezra's time. 3. Others say, That they were placed to the Law, and the rest of the Scriptures, as they were first written. 4. But all the rest, except Elias only, say that Ezra, and the great Sanhedrim of his time, first invented and placed them to the Text. So that in this they all agree, That by the time of Ezra, at latest, they were invented and placed to the Scripture; and thereby they own their Divine Original and Authority, as do the generality of Chri∣stians likewise.

2. Those that place their Original to the Second Period, affirm that they were not invented before A. D. 500. though they also differ as to the precise time of their first Invention: About which they hold Three different Opinions. 1st. That they were began and ended, simul & semel, A. D. 500. as Elias saith was his Opinion, in Tob taam lettar page tsade, cap. 2. I think (saith he) that those who found out the Points, found out also the Accents, and placed both of them to the Letters at one time. Which in his Masoret Hammasoret, Pref. 2. he de∣clares was about the Year 500. The Evi∣dences which he brings for his Opinion, and the Testimony he produceth out of Aben Ezra, Cosri, Kimchi, and Tsak Sepha∣taim, shall be at large examined in the fol∣lowing Chapters, and the Improbability and Absurdity of his Opinion fully discovered afterwards in its proper place. A brief Relation of the Two other Opinions, and Examination of them (by the way,) is the Work of this Chapter: And they are these.

2. The Second different Opinion about their Novel Invention, is that of Ludovicus Capellus, who supposeth they were began A. D. 500. and ended A. D. 1030. by Ben Asher, and Ben Naphthali, Arcanum Puncta∣tionis Revelatum, cap. 17. But for this Opi∣nion he brings no Testimony nor Reason, as Buxtorf observes, de Punct. Orig. pag. 267. Hanc vero cum in libris & authoribus nullis ••epe∣riret suopte marte, & ingenio eam hoc pacto nobis procudit. And all that Capellus pretends to alledge, is only what Elias Levita men∣tions out of Maimonides on another ac∣count, about Ben Asher's Copy, the Jews leaning upon it, because he spent many Years in Correcting of it: The words of Maimonides are these:

And the Book that we lean upon in these things, is a Book that is known in Egypt, comprizing the Twenty four Books of Scripture, which was in Ierusalem many Years ago, to Cor∣rect Books by it; and all lean upon it, because Ben Asher Corrected it, who was exact therein many years, and Corrected it many times as he Transcribed it; and and on him I lean in the Book of the Law, which I have written after his manner.

This Elias repeats, and addeth,

And so we lean upon his Reading in all these Countreys; and the Men of the East lean on the Reading of Ben Naphthali; and

the differences between them are only about little Accents, as Metheg and Mak∣kaph, and Munach, and Pashta, single and double: And the divisions about the Points, are only about Holem and Kamets, Katuph and Kamets, Gadol and Pathak, and Sheva, and Kateph Pathak; and so of Dagesh, and Raphah, and Milhill, and Milrah, &c.

But doth Elias suppose these in whole, or in part to be the Authors of the Puncta∣tion? Nay, he saith the quite contrary is evident in the words immediately before these of Maimonides: And thus saith Elias,

But as to the Divisions that are between Ben Asher and Ben Naphthali, being only about Points and Accents, there is no doubt but that they were written after the Points and the Accents were founded: And this (saith he) is easie to understand.

Masoret Hamasoret, Pref. 3. pag. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 3. as indeed it is; for the differences being about the se∣veral Parts of the Punctation, both Points, Vowels and Accents, all those Parts must needs have been before in being, or they could not have been the matter of division or difference between them.

Obj. What made Ben Asher so long about it, if he only Corrected it?

Sol. The Nature and Weight of the thing, to make it a Standard; by which, to try all Copies of their only Rule of Faith, wherein it was needful to observe exactly, and compare faithfully, by the best Copies, every Letter, Point and Ac∣cent of the Scripture; and after that, to write it over, until that there neither want∣ed, nor yet abounded one Letter, Point or Accent of all the Bible; was a work where∣in many Years might be taken up, with∣out supposing him to be the Author of any part of the Punctation, because he was long in exact Correcting of it.

So that here, as Elias leaveth Capellus; so also the Testimony doth not help him at all, and others he hath none.

2. As Capellus leaves Elias, about the Sence of Maimonides; so they differ greatly in the Method and Order wherein they suppose the several parts of the Punctation were invented. Capellus conceiteth they were 500 years in compiling, after this manner: (1.) They distinguished the Verses by two thick strokes, for Soph pasuk. (2.) Next to that, they placed the five long Vowels, a, e, i, o, u. (3.) Then the Pauses, or great Stops, by the Accents. (4.) Then the les∣ser Stops, &c.— But he brings no Testi∣mony to prove it, and 'tis no more than his own single Conjecture. Now Elias saith they were all made at one time, A. D. 500. and that in another manner: For Elias saith, that next unto the placing of the Period, they placed the Colon, or Athnack; and then the Sakeph: And it was necessary (saith Elias) that they should do all this before they placed the Points, because that many of the Points are changed, by reason of Athnack and Soph pasuk; as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c.

And indeed, on this Account, Capellus his Opinion is absurd; for the Vowels could not be placed before Athnack, and the other Accents (which change the Vow∣els one into another) were fixed.

And that the Points cannot be 500 years in composing (viz. from A. D. 500. until A. D. 1040. as Capellus thinks they were,) the Nature of the Masoretick Notes, and the Time unavoidably to be allotted for the same, do evince.

For the Masorites have made their Notes on the Anomalies of all the parts of the Punctation: So that the whole of the Punctation must needs have been finished long before their time; who yet must needs have been before the time of Ben Asher; because the Grammarians succeeded him, and take no notice of any Masorites of their time; which they could not have omitted, if there had been any such Criticks in Gram∣mar-learning among them, as the Masorites were. And yet 'tis as absurd to suppose these Masorites to be before Ben Asher, as it was to suppose them since his time. Be∣cause,

(1.) They had then been Contemporary with the Authors of some part of the Pun∣ctation, and before the Authors of the last part of the Punctation: Which is most absurd, as shall be made to appear from the Nature of the Masoretick Notes, which do manifestly shew that the whole of the Punctation was long before those Observa∣tions: For else we must suppose there were several sets of Masorites that did successively arise after every Set of Authors of each part of the Punctation, as it was gradually invented and placed. But this we cannot imagine: Because,

1. The First Set of Masorites must then have been so near the Authors of that part of the Punctation which was invented be∣fore their time, as to have been able to know the Reasons of the Anomalies; which if they had known, no doubt but they would have mention'd them, there being no way like it to restrain Posterity from altering of them: Which was the main End of all their Observations, so to keep them even as they found them: And the same may be said of every Set of Masorites suc∣cessively.

2. Then the First Set of Masorites must have been Authors of the Punctation it self, rather than bare Annnotators on it, being much more fit than after Ages so to be: For if they durst only observe the Anomalies of that part of the Punctation which was before them; how then durst any who came after their time become Authors, who had no more, nor yet so much skill and ability for the same? For the succeeding Authors must place the parts of the Puncta∣tion, of which they were the Authors of the Shapes thereof, according as they had received the knowledge of the Force, Sound or Pronunciation thereof, from these Ma∣sotites, who were their Predecessors, who yet durst not attempt any such things them∣selves.

3. If the Masorites were of such distant and divers Ages, there would then be a proportionable difference in their Style and Dialect; and those who made Notes on the First Part of the Punctation, would have been known by their Style, Dialect, or Authority, from those who made their Notes on the Last Part of it. But there is no Mark or Means left whereby we can dis••ern who were first, or who were last, by any difference of Style, Dialect or Au∣thority, in any one part of the Masore∣tick Notes, from another part of it: So that these Masorites could not be before the whole of the Punctation was finished, nor yet since Ben Asher's time; and therefore the Punctation must needs have been finish∣ed before Ben Asher's time: Which holds good against the Third Opinion, which is, That they were begun and ended by Ben Asher. As also doth what Elias hath said before about it: And therefore no Testi∣mony being brought by any for this Opi∣nion, and few or none at this time contend∣ing for it, we need not enlarge upon it.

But seeing Capellus would be accounted to be, for the main, of Elias his Opinion, though he differs from him in these Parti∣culars, as to the time taken up in Com∣posing the Punctation, and the like; yet seeing he pleads for his Opinion with all Elias's Arguments, which Elias brings for his own Opinion, and chideth Buxtorf for stating his Opinion, as if it were different from that of Elias, seeing he agrees with him, that they might be begun by the Maso∣rites, A. D. 500. Therefore we shall ex∣amine the Arguments and Objections of Capellus more at large, together with the Opinion and Arguments of Elias, which we shall begin to take in hand in the fol∣lowing Chapter.

CPAP. II. The Evidences for the Novelty of the Points considered, in the Examination of the Opi∣nion of Elias Levita, and of the Testimonies produced by him and his Followers, Capel∣lus and Others, for the same; in General.

WHereas there is no Testimony pro∣duced by any, for the Proof of the Time, Place and Persons, when, where, or by whom the Points were invented or placed, A. D. 500. or since that time, but only those Expressions that Elias Levita hath gathered out of Aben Ezra, Cosri, Kimki, Tsak Sephataim, &c. as he supposeth, in favour of his Opinion, That the Points were invented, Simul & Semel, A. D. 500. and then placed by the Masorites of Tiberias: It will be convenient therefore to examine the Evidences for the Novelty of the Points, under this Opinion of Elias, seeing they were first brought by him for the Proof of his own Notion. But we must distinguish between the Arguments which are brought, or Objections made against the Antiquity of the Points; and the Evidences for the ubi, quando, & à quibus, when, where, and by whom precisely they were invented: For most of the strength of Capellus, and Others, is placed in making Objections against the Antiquity of the Points, which we intend to consider in the SECOND PART: And such are the Objections: (1.) Of Reading an Vnpointed Copy of the Law in the Synagogue: (2.) The Samaritan, and other Eastern Languages, being without Points: (3.) The LXX. and other Ver∣sions, not following the present Punctation: (4.) The Silence of Jerom, and the Fathers: (5.) The Silence of the Caballistical Writers: (6.) The Silence of the Talmuds, the Mishna, and Gemara, about the Points: (7) The No∣velty of the Names of them: (8.) The Redun∣dancy, Superfluity and Anomalies of the Pun∣ctation, and the like, do only conclude a bare Conjecture against their Antiquity, but do not so much as touch the Time, Place and Persons, when, where, and by whom positively the Punctation was in∣vented and placed; which alone is our pre∣sent Enquiry. Nay, indeed they tell us they do not insist much, when, where, and by whom the Points were invented, whether A. D. 500, 600, 700, or 800. whether by the Mosorites, or Others at Ti∣berias, or elsewhere, so it be granted the Points be not of Divine but Humane Ori∣ginal. Vid. Considerator Considered, p. 219. Capellus Arcanum & Vindicia, in the Prooemium; and yet do say that Elias hath proved they were invented, A. D. 500. by the Masorites of Tiberias, Prol. 3. §. 42.

But we say we'll not be so served; for before we quit the Punctation, we'll know when, where, and by whom it was in∣vented within this last Thousand Years, then we'll yield it. But if they can't prove this, we'll abide by our own: For if it were invented so lately, they might be able to shew us when, where, and by whom it was invented, and placed to the Text; for it is impossible the whole World of Jews and Christians should universally receive it, without taking notice when, where, and by whom it came. So that will they or nill they, we must examine what they can say to this Point, When, where, and by whom the Points were first invented, and placed to the Text. Now if they were placed since A. D. 500. it must be done by the Jews; they would never have received it at the Hands of Christians, had any been able to have done it.

This must then have been best known to the Jews; and none of them would have done more, to gather up the Evidences hereof, than Elias, the first and last of this Opinion among them. This he hath done as well as he could, which we shall now examine, seeing his Followers have added nothing to what he hath produced in this Matter: Which amounts to no more than some dubious Expressions of

four Rabbins about the Punctation, viz. Aben Ezra, Kimki, Cosri, and Tsak Sephataim; and what they say in Commendation of the Skill of the Masorites of Tiberias. Now we shall examine the Quotations out of the four Rab∣bins, about the Punctation: And we say in General,

1. We deny that any one of these Rab∣bins do speak one Word for the Novelty of the Points: But if they did all four speak positively for it, what could be thence concluded more than this, That four Jews were of this Opinion, contrary to the universal Belief of all their own People.

2. Our Adversaries say the Jews are not fit to be heard, when they speak in the Praise of their own Nation; for they are partial to their own Glory. But nothing could be said more to their own Honour than this, That they were enabled by the Lord to perform so great, so useful and admi∣rable a Work as the present Punctation is; even then when the Christians said they were under the Curse of God, for Cru∣cifying of Christ. The Time of Ezra needed not the Honour, it had as much besides as this was, there being several Books of Scripture then written by Men divinely inspired; but the poor ignorant Jews, A. D. 500. despised of all the World, and rejected of God for their Unbelief, wanted such an Encomium. So that by their own Argument, their Testimony is to be re∣jected; because it is in their own Cause, and for their own Glory, of which they are too ambitious.

3. But we deny that Aben Ezra, Kimki, Cosri, and the Author of Tsak Sephataim, do suppose the Points to be a Novel Inven∣tion. For,

First, We shall produce plainer Testi∣monies out of these very Authors, wherein they plainly express themselves for the An∣tiquity of the Points.

Secondly, We shall prove they have wrest∣ed those places they have collected; and that the genuine Sence of the Authors, in those very places they have alledged out of them, is very consonant unto, and doth well agree with what the same Authors say elsewhere for the Antiquity of the Points.

We shall begin, in the First place, with Aben Ezra; who, by Elias and his Follow∣ers, is esteemed Instar Omnium; none being, in their Opinion, so fully of their mind in this Matter.

CHAP. III. The Opinion of Aben Ezra for the Antiquity of the Points, particularly considered.

IN the Consideration of Aben Ezra's Opi∣nion, we shall, First, Produce plain Te∣stimony out of him, for the Antiquity of the Points. And then, Secondly, Discover the Frauds and Violence which Elias and his Followers have used to wrest his words; in the places they alledge out of him.

First then, We shall produce what he saith for the Antiquity of the Points; and to this purpose we shall translate a full Testimony out of his Book, entituled, Mo∣zenee haleshon hakkodesh, towards the begin∣ning of it, as it is delivered by Buxtorf, De Punct. Origine, pag. 13. The words are these, or to this effect, viz.

The words of the Lord are pure Words, or Sayings, preserved by the hands of holy Men, one Generation after another: For they were sanctified from the Womb; they heard the holy words at the Mouth of him who is most excellent in Holiness; and they were Interpeters between him (viz. the Lord,) and between Iacob. The holy People and these were before the building of that holy House (viz. the Temple,) and when it stood upon its Basis, or Founda∣tion; and after it, until the Vision and Prophecy was sealed up. But after a few years, about the time of the building of the holy House the second time, at that time the Spirit of the Lord, the Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding rested upon the Men of that House that were called, Anashee keneset haggedolah, The Men of the great Synagogue, or Sanhedrim, to explain all that was sealed up in the Command.And the words that are translated by the Mouth of the Just Men from the Mouth of the former and latter Prophets, (that is, delivered by Oral Tradition, from hand to hand.) Also they were rendring a Reason, (or resto∣ring the Accent Meshebe taam, Prov. 26.16.) and taught their Posterity, Chephets Col¦inian, the sence of every word or thing; al jad taamee hamikra, by the hand or means of the Accents of the Scripture: And the Kings and the Ministers they taught their Posterity; and the closed Sections, and the open Sections: And what continues, carries on the sence (in opposition to the Pause,) and the Verses or Pauses that stop the sence; and they were Eyes to the Blind; therefore we go in their steps, and follow after them, and lean upon them in all the Expositions of Scripture. And after the Captivity of our Fathers from the Holy City, the Lord stirred up the Spirit of his Saints; and the Chief of them was our holy Rabbi (viz. Iudah) to compose what was noted in loose Wri∣tings of the Commands of our God, and that is the Mishna; whereunto nothing may be added, nor may any thing be taken away from it. Also after them, came other holy Princes, and pious Hero's, and they are the Men of the Talmud (viz. the Gemarists,) and they went on in their paths (viz. of the Masters of the Mishna,) and they took up the Stones out of the High-ways of the Testimony, and they removed every Stumbling-stone out of the

paths of the Lord. And after this, stood up in Israel, according to the good Hand of our God upon us, two great Rows, or Orders, (Neh. 12.31.) the one keeping the Walls of the Sanctuary of Strength, Dan. 11.31. (founded by the Hand of our God,) that no Stranger may be able to destroy it. Now this Sanctuary, is the Holy Books of Scripture; and the Men of this Row or Order, are the Men of the Masora, or the Masorites, who sepa∣rated all the mixed Multitude from the holy People, (alluding to Nehem. 13.3. and meaning what is Humane from what is Divine, in Correcting the Copy:) And they numbred the Men of the Sanctuary, from Two or Eleven, to the end that no Stranger might draw near to the Gates of Righteousness. Blessed be the Lord our God, who hath put such a thing as this in the heart of the rest of the Kingdom of his Priests, to beautifie his House, which is a House of Wisdom; as Solomon saith, Wisdom hath built her House. And the second Row, that goeth over against it, And I go after it, Neh. 12.38. are those that are expert in War, alluding unto Cant. 3.8. in the Law, or about the Law; and they are the Grammarians.

— Thus far Aben Ezra.

In this place (saith Buxtorf) Aben Ezra doth elegantly and discreetly Expound in what manner, and by whom the holy Word of God was preserved from the Beginning, quite down to the Time of the Gramma∣rians; and what was done in every Age about the Preservation thereof, and by whom it was done.

For, First, he saith, The true and ge∣nuine Sence of the Word of God was pre∣served (without Points) by holy Men, such as Moses, and the Prophets, unto the time of the Second Temple, and the time wherein Vision and Prophecy were sealed up.

Secondly, After the building of the Se∣cond House, about the ending of Prophecy, or the Prophetick Gift and Ministry, God raised up other holy Men, to wit, the Men of the Great Synagogue, (that is to say, Ezra, with his Councel,) who preserved the Word of God, which was brought to them by Oral Tradition. This Holy Scripture they did by other means than Tradition, with great care and study deliver down to Posterity: But how they did this, and what in particular it was that the Men of the Great Synagogue did about the Preservation of the Scripture; this he doth teach parti∣cularly, and by Parts.

For, First, he saith, That this was done, Al jad taamee hamikra, By the means of the Accents of the Scripture.

Secondly, By the Kings and Ministers, that is the Vowels. The Kings he calls after∣wards seven, viz. Holem, Shurek, Chirek, Pathak, Segol, Kamets, Tsere: And the Mi∣nisters, Sheva, Mute, Mobile, and Com∣pound: And he doth not mean the Accents which the Grammarians divided into Kings and Ministers. (Vid. Balmes, cap. 3. of the Points, more of this.)

Thirdly, By the Doctrine concerning the Sections that are close, open, or continued; Hasetumim, Vpetuchim, Vdebikim.

Fourthly, By Hapesukim, the Verses, or the Distinction of the Scripture into Verses; by these helps he saith they are like Eyes to the Blind, and in their Steps we go, in Reading and Expounding the Scripture at this time: He saith, we every where lean on their Exposition of the Scripture, and therefore not of the Tiberian Masorites.

Thirdly, In the Third place, after the Men of the Great Synagogue, he proceeds to the Masters of the Mishna, and to them he chiefly ascribes the true Explication of the Precepts of God.

Fourthly, He makes the Talmudists, or Gemarists, succeed the Masters of the Mishna; and to these he ascribeth the Illu∣stration and Explication of the Doctrine of the Mishna, and their Disputations.

Fifthly, He saith, By the good Hand of God to Israel, he raised up Two other Or∣ders of Men, labouring profitably for the Preservation of the Scripture. The First Order he ascribeth to the Masorites; but unto these he ascribeth no Invention, either of the Points, or of the Accents, or of the Distinctions. But he principally commends these, for Two things.

First, That they did separate every thing that was strange (that is, Foreign or Hu∣mane) from the Books of Scripture, if any thing had by hap crept into it.

Secondly, That they numbred the Words and Letters of the Books of Scripture, that so there might be no way left whereby the Text could be corrupted in time to come. And agreeing to this, is what he writes of the Masorites, in his Book entituled, Iesu∣dee Mora, — Truly there is a Reward to the Works of the Masorites, who are like those who keep the Walls of a City: For by reason of them, the Law of the Lord, and the holy Books of Scripture, do stand in their Form, without any Addition, or Diminution. This is the sum and substance of Aben Ezra's words: From whence it appears (saith Buxtorf) as clear as the Noon∣day:

First, That he did not make the Tiberian Masorites, but the Men of the Great Syna∣gogue (the Head of whom was Ezra,) to be the Authors of the Invention of all the Points, Accents and Distinctions: For he reckons up the Tiberian Masorites long after the Authors of the Points, Accents and Di∣stinctions. Nor is there left any room for that Exception, That he speaks only of the Power and Force of the Points and Accents: For his Words are too manifest, and the or∣der of his Speech will not allow this; for he shews what was done in every Age, for the Preservation of the Scripture: But if he had spoken here of the Oral Explication of the Scripture only, what then did the

Men of the Great Synagogue do, other than those before them? Did not they do this, and for this were commended by him? And if he thought the Masorites invented them first, why did he not expresly ascribe it to them, when he made mention of them? In vain therefore doth Capellus, in his Vin∣diciae, make the Objection, That the Sound, and not the Shapes, were meant by him of Ezra, when he knew Buxtorf had already Answered it. Moreover, Capellus says, Aben Ezra is as much for him elsewhere, and so no witness against him.

Resp. This we deny: But if he were, he is for us here, and therefore can be no Witness against us: We can spare him, having all besides him for us; better than they can, who have not another for them.

Secondly, He saith, Why did not Ezra as well Write the Oral Law, as Point the Text?

Reply: Because the Scripture is the only Rule of Faith, and so esteemed by them; but the Oral Law was but Humane Tradi∣tion, of no account then, however it were afterwards admired; and it then became needful to Point the Text, that it might be plain, seeing they had in part forgot∣ten their Tongue in Captivity, and was never since restored to be Vulgar.

Capellus asks, Why might not Ezra deliver the Sounds of the Points to Israel, as well as the Oral Law, by Tradition?

Resp. We deny the Oral Law was de∣livered by Ezra to Israel; but if it were, as the Jews imagine, yet was there not that need to write one as the other: They could keep their Oral Traditions, not∣withstanding any Alteration of their Lan∣guage; but so could they not preserve the true Punctation of the Language, when it ceased to be vulgarly spoken or understood. But when through their many Dispersions they were in danger of losing their Tradi∣tions, then they wrote them; as R. Samuel Arcuvolti declares in Arugath Habosem, who says also, It was necessary that the Points were placed in Ezra's time, though it had been un∣lawful before; because the Sound could not be preserved longer than that time without them.

Capellus Vindiciae, lib. 1. cap. 1 §. 11. objects, Was not Ezra enough, with a Prophe∣tick Spirit, what need of the Sanhedrin?

Resp. (1.) The Sanhedrin was instituted. (2.) Others were Prophets, as Haggai, &c. and why must they be excluded? (3.) This is the General Opinion of Jews and Chri∣stians, That Ezra, and the Prophets did act in Conjunction with the Great Sanhedrin, in the Reformation of the Church, as they were commanded. But of this more else∣where may be spoken.

Capellus Vindiciae, lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 9. says, What Aben Ezra says of Ezra, is no more than is due to any skilful Grammarian.

Resp. Not so. For, First, as Cosri says, 'Tis a Work Divine, and requires Divine Aid, to give the true Sence of Scripture in∣fallibly and truly.

2. That might be done by Ezra, by Humane Ability, whilst the Language and the Text was rightly read and pronounced, that could not be done, after the Tongue ceased to be vulgarly understood, without Divine Aid: And therefore, though it were no more than Humane Skill, yet none since Ezra could be supposed to have that, and therefore it might well enough belong to him on that account.

So that here is an express Testimony of Aben Ezra for the Antiquity of the Points, notwithstanding all the Exceptions made by Capellus against it.

CHAP. IV. The several places of Aben Ezra wrested by Elias and his Followers, considered: Their genuine Sence declared.

WE are now to discover the Fraud and Violence used by Elias and his Followers, to wrest the places of Aben Ezra, in the places they alledge out of him, in favour of their Opinion; and to shew, that what he saith in those places, doth well enough agree with what he hath elsewhere said for the Antiquity of the Points.

The First place we shall take notice of, is in his Book, entituled, Tsakooth, alledged by Elias, and after him by Capellus: Where∣in Aben Ezra saith, There are many Inter∣preters, who charge the Author of the Distin∣ction of the Text into Verses, with Errour there∣in, but they do not speak what is right, and Rabbi Moses the Priest is one of them, &c. But I admire at this greatly, how the Author of the Stops or Ver∣ses should err, ve aph ki im hu Ezra hasopher, seeing he was Ezra the Scribe. The Novelists read it, And if he were Ezra the Scribe. This in general he saith, That there hath arisen no Man so wise as the Author of the Pauses since his time; for we see that throughout the whole Scripture he hath made the stops no where but where they should be placed. Thus far Aben Ezra.

Here Elias owneth, that Hamaphsik, the Author of the Stops, is meant the Puncta∣tor; but he wonders why he is called so in the Singular Number, being elsewhere in this Book mentioned in the Plural. But this Buxorf denies is any where men∣tioned in the Plural in this Book, though the Matter is small, whether the one, or the other; for the Singular might mean Ezra, as the Head of the Sanhedrin; and the Plural might mean Ezra, in Conjun∣ction with the Sanhedrin.

Elias inferrs from this place, That Aben Ezra did not believe the Points were given by Moses on Sinai.

Resp. We grant it: For we say it was his Opinion that Ezra placed them: And that Opinion doth well agree with this place.

Capellus objecteth, 'Tis too mean a Com∣mendation of the Author of the Points, to sup∣pose

he meant Ezra, when he says, There has been none so wise since him, and that it was done perfectly right.

Resp. 'Tis Praise enough for Ezra or Moses either, to say, That none has arisen like him: And, That the Punctation is ex∣actly according to the Mind of God, and in all the Parts of it true and right. And as to Others, who charge the Punctator with Errour, he reproveth them for the same, seeing (as he says) that Ezra the Scribe made it.

Capellus infers hence, That some, as this R. Moses, &c had no such esteem for the Points, and did not think they were made by Ezra.

Resp. First, But Aben Ezra is not of that mind; which is the thing that is to be proved: For he reproveth it in them, and they want Witnesses who seek after those who are convicted of Errour therein. But they might charge the Punctator with Er∣rour, and yet allow Ezra to be the Au∣thor of it, by supposing, as Capellus himself doth, that there might be crept into the Text some Mistakes, through the length of Time, and humane Frailty of the Scribes, who wrote the Bible from the Copies that were before them: And 'tis more likely, that both Aben Ezra, and these Persons, owned Ezra to be the Author of the Points, because he makes that an Argument, seeing Ezra made it, or if Ezra made it; either way shew it was a received Principle among them, and therefore goes not to prove it, but improves it, and infers from it, as a thing acknowledged, especially by those he reproves.

Secondly, That Aben Ezra doth call the Punctator Hamaphsik, and meaneth Ezra thereby, appears by what he saith else∣where, as on Esther 9.27. on the words Keketabam, according to their writing:

The sence is (saith he,) that the Volume of Esther should be read even just as it was written, without Points; and that because Ezra the Scribe, Hiphsick Hapesukim, distinguished the Verses, which was not done till many years after the writing of this Volume: Therefore, our Wise Man, of happy memory, command∣ed, That he that reads this Volume of Esther, should not stop at the end of a Verse.

— Hence Buxtorf observes, He saw the Volume of Esther Unpointed.

Now in this place he expressly nameth Ezra the Hammappesik, or Pauser, or Pun∣ctator: And in other places it is manifest, that the Hammappesik, or maker of the Ver∣ses, was also the Maker of the Points, Vowels and Accents: Which Elias himself alloweth, saying, Vpeerush hammappesik mi shesam happesikat hattaamim: And the mean∣ing of Hammappesick, the Pauser, the Pun∣ctator, is he that placeth the Pausing of the Accents.

Hence Dr. Walton and Capellus are mi∣staken, who suppose that by Hammappesik, no more is intended, than he that placed the two thick Strokes, or divided the Text into Verses; which they allow to be much more ancient than the Points, Vowels and Accents: For, as Buxtorf observeth, Aben Ezra, in Tsakooth, doth often use the Verb Hiphsik, not only to distinguish the Verses by two Points or Strokes, but also to di∣stinguish Verses by distinguishing Accents and Pauses: As he saith in Tsakooth, before the words last alledged, Behold (saith he) we see that he (viz. Hammappesik the Pun∣ctator) hath put the Accent in the word Sham, Gen. 21.33. which joyneth that with the word Shem that followeth: But in Exod. 34.5 there Hiphsiko he makes a Stop, (that is, makes an Athnak,) which distinguisheth it from the fol∣lowing words. So that Hammappesick the Ac∣centator, or Punctator, is the same with Baal Hattaamim, the Author of the Accents or Punctation. For so Aben Ezra, in his Commentary on this very place, Exod. 34.5. calls him there Baal Hattaamim, the Author of the Accents; who is here called Ham∣mappesik, the Punctator.

Capellus in Vind. lib. 1. cap. 1. §. 5. would suppose Hammaphsik to be he that placed the Sounds and Force, but not the Shape.

Resp. But, First, Elias plainly affirms that it is he that placed the Shapes: And so doth Capellus himself allow the same else∣where, viz. in his Arcanum, lib. 1. cap. 2. §. 5. he saith there,

That none may think because 'tis said Maphsick in the Singular Number, the Punctator; therefore it was Ezra, and not the Masorites, that Pointed the Text: Saith he, Aben Ezra doth else∣where call them Maphsikim, the Puncta∣tors, in the Plural, in his Book Moze∣naim.

So that here he allows Maphsik to be the Placer of the Shapes, where he can but bring it to the Masorites of Tiberias.

Capellus objects, 'Tis not said, Which was not done till many years after the writing of Esther; but, Which was done not many years after the writing of Esther.

Resp. First, It matters not which way it be read, as to the Point in debate; 'tis brought to prove that Ezra was the Maph∣sik, the Punctator; which it proveth plain∣ly whether way it be read, long after, or not long after; Ezra Pointed it after both sences allow.

Capellus would fain suppose the Sound might be kept by Tradition, or Custom, to the time of the Masorites. But this we have elsewhere showed cannot be.

Secondly, The rest of the places alledged by Elias and his Followers, out of Aben Ezra, for the Novelty of the Points, are principally Two that commend the Skill and Fidelity of the Masorites of Tiberias, about the Punctation. We shall therefore,

First, Consider the scope of the places themselves, to find thereby whether he esteemed the Masorites to be the Inventors, or Reformers and Correctors of the Pun∣ctation. And,

Secondly, We shall consider what Aben Ezra, and Others say, in Commendation

of the Masorites of Tiberias; wherein lyes all the strength of the Evidence that Elias or his Followers do bring for the precise Time, Place and Persons, when, where, and by whom it is supposed the Points were first invented: And we shall here consider, whether what is spoken in Commendation of them, do belong to them as Inventors, or as Restorers, or Correctors of the Pun∣ctation.

Thirdly, We shall shew that Aben Ezra doth not ascribe the Invention of the Points to the Masorites; because he oft differs from them, and opposeth them; but always fol∣lows the Punctuation, and enjoyns all others so to do.

First then, We are to consider the places themselves, and the scope, and true mean∣ing of them.

The First is this, taken out of Aben Ezra's Book, Tsakooth, pag. 138. col. 2. alledged by Elias Masoret Hammasoret, Prefat. 3. pag. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 6. The words are these: And this is the Custom of the wise Men of Tiberias, and they are the Foundation; for from them were the Men of the Masora, and we have from them received all the Punctation. The place more at large is this: The Punctators (saith Aben Ezra immediately before the words alledged) are used to point Sheva under Tau, in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Asit, which is the Second Person Feminine, that it might not be confounded with the Masculine. Then he brings an Objection, saying, If any one ob∣jects, What need was there to place Sheva there? for seeing that Kamets was not under the letter Tau, was it not easily understood that there was to be a quiescent Sheva, because it was the last letter of the word; (for the last letter of every word that is without its own proper moveable Vowel, Sheva, belongs to them, whether it be expressed or not.) Now the Answer to this Objection con∣tains the words of the Quotation; viz. And thus the Wise Men of Tiberias have used; or thus is their Manner or Custom: And they are the Foundation; for from them were the Men of the Masora, and from them have we received all the Punctation. He goes on further, and saith, Perhaps they did so, that no Man might think that the Punctator had forgotten, (that is to Point that Tau,) and doubted about it, (that is to say, how he should read it.) This is the place at large; we are now to examine the sence and meaning of it.

First then, he saith, That there were cer∣tain Punctators that had a custom to place Sheva under Tau, at the end of a word. Then he tells who these were that did use so to do; and they were not all the Punctators, but those of Tiberias, the same also who were the Masorites; Ergo, there were others who did not use so to do, (though not of the like esteem for Skill herein as the Masorites.) Therefore, Thirdly, He shews what value this Tiberian Punctation ought to be of with us; which is by him expressed to be of such worth, as that we ought to follow them in all things, as being the most dili∣gent of the Punctators.

What Capellus objects here, is, That Bux∣torf translates, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, There are some Pun∣ctators: And thence inferrs, there were other Punctators than the Masorites.

Resp. He doth not translate the word, nor doth he inferr from that word; but what he saith, There are some Punctators, re∣lates to the scope of the place; and from the same he draws this Inference, as very well he may; as might easily be plainly de∣monstrated, were it worth while to enlarge upon the Point. But to proceed:

Fourthly, He shews the End why the Ma∣sorites did thus: Which was this, lest the Reader should think that here was some∣thing wanting, and might stick in doubt how it should be read: Lest (saith he) any one should think that the Punctator had for∣gotten something. This certainly he doth not say of the same Tiberian Masorites, but of some other former Punctator: For if he had meant the same Masorites here, he should have said, Shelo jakshob Adam ki sha∣kachu; That no Man might think that they had forgotten: And not Shakach; That He had forgotten. So that Aben Ezra did not reckon the Tiberian Masorites to be the Au∣thors of the Punctation, but the Correctors and the Preservers thereof in its Original Purity, as we may perceive by the scope of the place.

The Second place, the sence whereof is to be considered, is what Aben Ezra saith in his Commentary on Exod. 25.31. on the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Teaseh raiti Sepherim shebe∣dakom Chokmee Tiberia, &c.

I have seen (saith he) the Books which the Wise Men of Tiberias searched, examined, corrected, and swore their fifteen Elders; that they had thrice considered every Word, and every Point, and every word that is writ∣ten full or defective, and behold, Iod is written in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Teaseh; but I have not found it so in the Books of Spain, France, or beyond the Seas, &c.'—

Now as to the sence of this place, what is more plainly spoken by these words than this, That they had three times searched or examined the Pointed Copies? There∣fore the Pointed Copies must be in being before their time, which they took and ex∣amined others by, and not their own in∣vented Shapes of the Points examined, as Dr. Walton supposeth: For Aben Ezra (saith he) saw the Book which the Tiberian Masorites Badaku, searched or examined: He doth not say, which they made or invented. Of these Books he saith, they swore the fifteen Elders; that they had thrice considered every Word, and every Point, and every Word that was written full or defective. Here we see their Consideration was as much on the Words as the Points; and of the words written full or defective, as either; and they can be no more thought hereby to be the Au∣thors of the Punctation, than of the Let∣ters and Words, and of the Words full

and defective; for as much is said of the one as of the other. If therefore they only searched, examined, or tried the one, they did no more to the other.

Again, What is it that Aben Ezra found in these Books thus examined by the Maso∣rites of Tiberias? Why it is this, That the letter Jod is there written in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Teaseh, which he did not find in other Copies, in Spain, France, or beyond Sea. Can we hence suppose that Aben Ezra did reckon that the Masorites were the Inventors or Authors of the letter Iod! Or of the placing it to the word? No one will say we can. No more can we suppose it of the Points, not yet so much, seeing the Instance al∣ledged is a Letter, and not a Point. So that the only thing that appears by his words, is, That he accounted the Books or Copies which they had examined by the best they had, to be the most exactly corrected, and therefore fittest to be the Standard: And on this account he might well say of them, they were, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Foundation, or Standard; for we still keep to their Copy, and all our Bibles now have Iod in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Teaseh, as the Masorites have, without supposing them to be the Authors of any part of the Scripture.

CHAP. V. What Aben Ezra, and other Iews, do say of the Masorites Skill, That they did not sup∣pose them to be the Authors of the Points, is proved.

WE come now to the Second thing to be discussed: And that is what Aben Ezra, and the rest of the Rabbins, do say of the Masorites of Tiberias, in Com∣mendation of their Skill and Accuracy in the Pronunciation of their Tongue, and about the Punctation. And here we are to enquire, Whether what they speak con∣cerning them, doth belong to the Masorites, as Authors, or Correctors and Restorers only of the Punctation.

The Testimonies which Buxtorf collects, in Commendation of the Masorites Accuracy, are these:

First, Aben Ezra saith, in his Book Tsakooth, fol. 136. col. 1. where speaking of long Kamets, he saith, The Men of Tiberias, also the Wise Men of Egypt and Africa, knew how to read Kamets Gadol. And fol. 135. col. 1. and saith that wise Man before-mentioned, (viz. R. Iudah Chi••g, the first Hebrew Gram∣marian,) That the Men of Tiberias read Sheva Mobile, if Iod follow after it, with the Vowel Chirek, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Iichesiahu Iermiahu: And if Kamets Gadol follow Sheva, as in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is read as Pathak short, as Barakah Shamarim, &c. In his Book Mozenaiim, fol. 221. col. 2. Rabbi Iudah the Grammarian, whose rest (saith he) be in Eden, saith, That Daleth in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Deu, is read as if with Shurek; because it hath after it a Guttural letter with Shurek, and so is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Deeh; or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Dei; and so are all like unto it: And they say that so the Men of Tiberias did pronounce.

Ephodeus, in his Grammar, cap. 5. fol. 35. col. 2. speaking of the true Pronunciation of the Hebrew Tongue, and that it is un∣known at this time, he saith,

And Rabbi Ionah (the next Grammarian to R. Iudah) hath already written, that Resh hath cer∣tain peculiar Properties, according to the way of the Men of Tiberias; for they are more clear (or elegant) in the Holy Tongue, than all the Hebrews.

The same he repeateth, cap. 32.

Balmesius, in his Grammar, under letter F 3. pag. 2. writeth thus: And the Tiberian Rea∣ders read it like the Pronunciation of Aleph with Shurek; but I know not the reason (saith he) why they so read it; speaking of Vau in the beginning of a word before a letter, with Sheva Mobile marked, which should be pronounced with Shurek, but here hath no other sound than a gentle Aleph.

And of this Pronunciation of Vau as Aleph, Aben Ezra saith, fol. 135. col. 2. I sakooth, So have we received of our Fathers, one age after another, that it should be so pro∣nounced. So Kimchi in Miklol, fol. 62. a.

Again, Balmesius saith, in letter F 1. pag. 1. speaking of the letters 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cheth and Ain, in the end of words, he saith: For many Grammarians which I have seen, lean upon the Readers of Tiberias, who pronounce it as if there were Aleph. For Ex∣ample: They read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Misbeach; as if it were written 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

In the Book entituled, Keneh binah, fol. 33. •• And in all the Variations (or divers Pronun∣ciations of the Points,) which are often-times divers ways pronounced, The Men of Tiberias are clear, more accurate and skilful, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, than all the Hebrews that are in other Countreys.

In the Book Leviath Chen, whose Author is R. Immanuel, Son of Iekutiel, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Benevontine, cap. 3. fol. 5.

And although there doth not appear any difference in our present reading between Koph and Caph with Dagesh, and between Teth and Tau daggesh'd, and between Vau and Beth ra∣phated; the Men of Tiberias, which were in those days, were more expert in our Language than all the Jews: They made a difference between them; and so they made a difference between the reading of Pathak and Kamets, and between Segol and Tsere, and between Kibbuez and Shurek.

— Again, cap. 18. fol. 19. col. 1. where treating of the Pronunciation of the letter Resh, he saith, In the reading of this letter Resh dageshed and raphated, the Men of Tiberias were expert (bekiim, skilful,) in those days, and in that time. And in fol. 105. col. 2. treating of the difference that is between divers Letters and Vowels in Verse, he saith,

And we are not skillful in the difference of their Sound (or Pronunciation,) like the Men of Tiberias, who were of old time more clear or skilful in the Language

than all the Hebrews, even as the best Gram∣marians have testified concerning them.

Rabbi David Kimchi in Michlol, fol. 108. col. 2. treating of the letters Begadkephat, saith,

That the Author of the Book Iet∣sirah, hath written Resh with them: For he saith there are seven Letters that dou∣ble, as Begadkephrat; but the pronoun∣cing of Resh raphated and dageshed, we do not hear or sound: But I have found (saith Kimki) in a Book of one Eli, the Son of Iudah Hannasir, who saith, That the sign or difference between Resh da∣geshed or raphated, or hard and gentle, belongs only to the Sons of Mesia, which is Tiberias; for they speak them in their Talk, and read them in reading the Scrip∣ture; and it is in the Mouths of Men, Women and Children; it departs not from them, and without any difference they read and speak Resh: Where it should be pronounced h••rd, there they use to speak or read it with Dagesh, and where it should be gentle or soft with Rapha, &c.

Rabbi Iehudah Mulcatus, in his Commen∣tary on the Book of Cosri, part 2. sect. 80. fol. 130. a. on those words of the Author Cosri, Or to hasten the reading, he saith these words, Teach the properties of right Reading, which were known to him, although they are now strange to us; as also many the like are in the reading of the Men of Tiberias, which is different from our reading. Vid Buxt. de Punct. Orig. par. 1. pag. 24, 25.

From all which Testimonies, it appears, saith Buxtorf, pag. 25. That the Men of Tiberias were no otherwise famous among the Jews, who were but Five hundred, or Six hundred years at most after them. Then,

First, For their skill at decently reading and pronouncing the Hebrew Tongue.

Secondly, And also for their study and care to preserve the true reading of the Scripture.

For if they had believed them to have been the Authors of the Points, doubtless they would not have passed over that with such negligent silence, as not to speak a word about it, when they speak of them, and of their Commendation.

Nor can their being praised for Skill und Accuracy in the Punctation, suppose them the Authors of it: For none need be told, that the Inventors of any Art are well ac∣quainted with their own Invention; and 'tis a slender Encomium to say of such, That they understand ther own Invention: For if they should not well understand their own Device, how should others? or who else should?

Of their Skill and Accuracy Ierom seems to have knowledge, alluding thereunto on Gen. 49.21. and that he hired a Iew of Ti∣berias to teach him to read: And as nei∣ther He nor the Rabbins ascribe the In∣vention of the Points to them; so the Pointed Bible of Hillel, in being long be∣fore their time, proves the contrary. And so much for the Second thing; that is, What Aben Ezra, and the rest of the Rabbins say in Commendation of the Skill and Accuracy of the Tiberian Masorites, in the Pronuncia∣tion of the Hebrew Tongue; and whether what they say of them, doth belong unto them as Authors, or as Correctors of the Punctation.

Thirdly, The Third thing to be proved, is, That Aben Ezra doth not ascribe the Invention of the Points to the Masorites; because he often differs from them, and opposeth them, but always follows the Punctation, and enjoyns all others so to do: As may be seen not only in the places before alledged; where he reproves those who charge the Punctator with Errour; and saith, He hath Pointed right in every place: And not only in his Comment on Exod. 34.5. but also in other places he expresseth the same esteem of the Authority and Per∣fection of the Punctation: As for Instance: in his Book Tsakooth, pag. 179. where he brings Hosea 4.10. They left off to take heed; he there saith,

If we should say so, we should thereby accuse Hammappesik Happesukim the Punctator, that he did not know the reason of the Accents; but far be it from us so to do: Chalilah, Cha∣lilah.

And in his Comment on Exod. 6.28. where our Translation ends that Verse, as also Deut. 2.16. with a Comma, the sence not making a Period: About which matter he saith,

It is to be admired, that the Orderer of the Parasha's should here divide into two Verses, that which by the sence seems to be but one: And the like is done, Deut. 2.16. We know not why 'tis done; but (saith he) 'tis like Baal Hahapesakoth, the Punctator, did know the reason why he did so; for his Knowledge is larger than ours.—

Hence he adviseth us to follow the Punctator always, as in his Book Mosenaim, fol. 19. b.

And be∣fore I expound unto thee all these things already mentioned (saith he,) I must ad∣monish thee, that thou dost go after Baal Hataamim, the Punctator: And whatso∣ever Exposition is not according to the Exposition of the Accents, do not agree to it, nor hearken to it; and do not mind the words concerning the Ten Verses that one of the Geonim saith do belong to the Verses following, or coming after them; for they are all right, and they are distinguished or divided according as the sence requireth.—

And pag. 198. col. 1. disputing against some, he saith,

And moreover, if their words were true, Lo hajah baal hateamim maphsik beathnak, besoph bemillath vejiphol, &c. the Baal Hateamim, who is Hammappesik, the Punctator, would not have made the Stop or Pause with Athnak in the end in the word Vejiphol, Gen. 45.14.— So pag. 200. b. He know∣eth (saith he) the Secret of Baal Hatea∣mim, the Punctator.— And elsewhere saith Buxtorf, He saith 'tis of great mo∣ment to keep the way of the Accents.

Now that Aben Ezra doth not sup∣pose the Punctator, or Punctators, to be

the Masorites, appears by this, That he treats the Masorites quite otherwise than he hath done the Punctator.

For, First, When he speaks of the Ma∣sorites, he doth not call them, Baal hatea∣mim and hammappesik, the Punctator; but he calls them, The Wise Men of the Masora; The Men of the Masora; and Baal Hammasoret, the Author of the Masora. And,

Secondly, He often differeth from, and opposeth the Masorites, but he never op∣poseth the Punctator. And that he oft dif∣fers from the Masorites, appears by these Instances.

In Tsakooth, 149. concerning the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Vehinnehhu, Jer. 18.3. which the Keri reads, divided into two words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Vehinneh hu, with Aleph added: As he reckons by the Masorites, he saith, This is not defective of Aleph, (that is, wanting Aleph;) for it is one word, though the Men of the Ma∣sora do say it is defective.

And fol. 150. col. 2. Ve taam anishee hammasoret eno taam; And the Reason of the Men of the Masora, is no Rea∣son.

So fol. 190. he saith concerning a Maso∣retick Observation, Ein tserik; There is not need of it. And so of others, fol. 191.2. fol 192.1. and elsewhere.

In the end of the Preface prefixed to the great Bibles, thus he saith, speaking of the Fifth way of Expounding Scripture, which he followeth himself:

And I will not (saith he) mention the Reasons of the Men of the Masora, why this word is written full, and why the other word is written defective; for all their Reasons are allegorical, their Reasons are only good for Children; for sometimes the Writer writeth a word full, which he doth to make it plain; and sometimes he writeth a word more obscurely, by the defect of a letter, for brevity sake, &c. but their Reasons are only good for Chil∣dren.

— So that we see he contemneth and oft opposeth the Masorites; but we shewed before, he honoureth, and always followeth the Punctator: Therefore we con∣clude that Aben Ezra doth not suppose the Masorites to be the Punctator or Authors of the Punctation.

Capellus Vind. lib. 1. cap. 1. sect. 10. ob∣jecteth, There might be two sorts of Maso∣rites: First, the Tiberian Punctators; and long after them, those that numbred the Let∣ters, and counted the Keri Uketib.

Resp. (1.) Neither Aben Ezra, nor any other Iew, make any such distinction. (2.) A posse ad esse non valet consequentia. (3.) 'Twould injure the former Masorites; for he opposeth and despiseth the Masorites in General; and if the Punctators, whom he reverenceth so much, were Masorites also, he would no doubt have excepted them particularly. (4.) Capellus hath hereby lost his Cause, by supposing the Authors of the Punctation, or Shapes of the Points, were long before those that numbred the Let∣ters, seeing the Talmuds, made before A. D. 500. do call those that numbred the Letters, the Ancients, as being long before their time; whereas Capellus his Opinion, is, That the Authors of the Points were not till after the Talmuds.

Capellus Vind. cap. 1. sect. 12. saith, If the Masorites restored and corrected the Punctation, our Faith is humane, if built thereon, as much as if they invented it.

Resp. Not so: For no more is required to preserve the Text uncorrupt, from Age to Age, than humane Care and Industry, under the conduct of Divine Providence; but the giving forth of the Scripture, and the ascertaining the Sence of Scripture, re∣quires Divine Assistance, and Evidence of Divine Authority.

Capellus objects, sect. 13. ibid. Vind. The Masorites had few Pointed Copies to correct by, or many: If few, how came they to differ? And if many, they were either about great Matters, or small: If about great Matters, then we stand on Humane Authority; if about small, then 'twas not worth their labour.

Resp. (1.) Themselves say nothing can be certainly spoken of those Times, by reason of the darkness of the History there∣of, and therefore they should not press us in this Point. (2.) How many Pointed Copies were then, we matter not; but that there were very great and many dif∣ferences in the Copies, we deny; the Pro∣vidence of God watching over his Word, to preserve it to the end of Time: The Superstitious care of the Jews, and the Religious Care of the Christians, would not consist with it; but some small diffe∣rence might be suffered, to quicken the di∣ligence of those whose duty and concern it was to preserve it; which might be well worth their time to Correct, and justly deserve the Praise of Posterity for the same.

Capellus objecteth, They must destroy all other Copies besides that which they corrected; and this was impossible to be done.

Resp. No more need for this, than for to burn Hereticks, and destroy all that differ from us: No, Truth is Light, the shining whereof dispelleth Darkness; and so is their Copy universally embraced as the Standard.

Capellus, Vind. cap. 1. sect. 17. saith, How know we that the Masorites did correct the Copies, seeing there is no History of it? And if they did correct them, (2.) It might be fallacious, and stuffed with many things in favour of their own Nation. (3.) Who can believe that these Men chose the best and most genuine sence always, and never mistook, either by Errour, Negligence or Design? (4.) Who can believe that our present Copies are the same as those which the Masorites corrected?

Resp. They most need to Answer these Questions themselves, who say they are the Authours of the Punctation: We allow them no more than to be Examiners or Correctors of it; which their superstitious

Care of the Text, and the general Esteem of the Jews of those Masorites, is enough to evidence the Truth of, as much as we need to lean on them for. But how do they solve these Doubts? Why, they say the Punctation yields generally a genuine and right Sence. If therefore this be strong enough to satisfie those who make them the Authors of the Punctation, that they were able and faithful in Point∣ing the Text; much more may it be a sufficient Satisfaction to those who allow them no further hand about the Punctation, than barely to examine the Copies, and follow the most and best Approved in their time. These are the faint Efforts of Per∣sons engaged in a desperate Cause.

And thus we have proved at large, that Aben Ezra is not of the Opinion that the Masorites Pointed the Text; and all that he saith about the Points, and the Punctation, proves the contrary: As also all that Aben Ezra, and the other Rabbins, say in Com∣mendation of the Skill and Accuracy of the Tiberian Masorites, proves no more than that they were skilful and faithful Cor∣rectors, or Collaters and Examiners of the Copies of their time; and doth not at all belong to them as Authors, or Inventors of the Punctation.

We are nextly to consider what other Rabbins, Elias and his Followers, bring to countenance their Opinion; though not one of the places they alledge speak one word about the Masorites of Tiberias, much less of their being the Inventors of the Punctation.

CHAP. VI. The Testimonies of Cosri, R. David Kim∣chi, and Tsak Sephataim, considered. Inferences from the Silence of the Iews, and the Insufficiency of the Evidences for the Novelty of the Points.

2. The Testimony of Cosri considered.

ELias in Masoret Hammasoret, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 2. col. 2. saith,

Thus saith the Author of Cosri, Without doubt it was kept in their Hearts, (that is, the Points from the time of Moses was,) with Pathak, and Kamets, and Sheva, and Chirek, and the Accents, &c. And they put seven Kings and Accents, which were Signs to express those Sounds which they had received of Moses from Sinai. And what thinkest thou of their ordering the Scripture first with Verses, and after that with Points, and then with Accents, and then with the Masora, with the Observation of the Words that are full or defective, until they had numbred the Letters? &c.—

Now, Quid sibi vult Elias? What doth Elias infer from hence? Why saith he, Behold, it was not his mind that Moses wrote them. We grant it: What then? Why saith Elias,

Oh that the Author of Cosri had explained to us who he meant, when he saith, Vesamu! and they put, or placed them (viz. the Points,) whether he meant the Men of the Great Synagogue, or the Masorites! But I think he meant the Ma∣sorites, saith Elias.

But why he thinks so, he says not. Well, be it so, the Jews think otherwise: And We think other∣wise, that he meant the Men of the Great Synagogue, both by the sence of the place in Cosri, and by the Exposition of Muscatus upon the place.

First, As to the sence of the place, the Author of Cosri saith in the place alledged,

That the Punctation was certainly made by Men divinely assisted, or it had never been so universally received as it is, and else Men of like ability might be able to do the like: And it was done (saith he) with admirable Wisdom; for it appears that in the fixing of the Points and Ac∣cents, there is such an Order therein, that cannot be done but by Divine As∣sistance; which is far otherwise than our Wisdom can attain unto, in every re∣spect, &c.

Now all the Jews acknowledge that none have been Divinely Inspired, and Infallibly Assisted, since the time of Ezra, that Pro∣phesie ceased: And therefore Cosri must needs mean the time of Ezra by Vesamu, And they put them. And Secondly, so R. Iu∣dah Muscatus, upon the place, Vesamu, And they put them, doth expound it, where he saith,

It appeareth to me, that by this indefinite Speech, he meaneth the Men of the Great Synagogue; for unto that time the Antecedents and Consequents, or what is spoken before it and after it, doth agree.

And thus we see the Father-in-Law, Cosri, is of the same mind with his Son-in-Law, Aben Ezra, that the Points were as ancient as Ezra's time.

3. R. David Kimchi's Testimony examined.

Elias in Masoret Hammasoret, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 7th. 2d. alledgeth what Kimchi saith in Miklol, pag. 69, 70. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

And the Or∣derers of the Pointing have put a diffe∣rence between the Third Pers. Sing. of the Preterperfect Tense of Niphal, and the Par∣ticiple Benoni Sing. for their reading is the same, viz. Niphkad, alike in both; and they have Pointed the middle radi∣cal letter of the Preterperfect Tense with Pathak, and the Participle Benoni with Kamets.

Now all that is hence objected, is, That if Kimchi had thought that Moses or Ezra had Pointed the Text, he would not have spoken in the Plural Numb. Metakkenim, the Orderers; but in the Singular.

Res. (1.) That doth not follow; for he might mean Ezra, in Conjunction with the Men of the Great Synagogue col∣lectively.

(2.) Other places of Kimchi shew what his Opinion is herein; though, as Buxtorf observes, the Jews speak of Ezra, and the Sanh••drin, in the Singular or Plural Num∣ber indifferently: Ezra is called the Head of the Scribes; and Aben Ezra, speaking of the 18. Tikkun Sopherim on Numb. 12.12. He calls them there, Tikkun Ezra.

But to ••ind Kimchi's Mind plainly, we shall view the places where he speaks his Thoughts about it: As,

First, In his Preface on Ioshua; where speaking of the Keri and Ketib, he saith,

It appears that these words were found thus, 〈…〉〈…〉 that in the former Capti∣vity the 〈…〉〈…〉, and the Wise Men were disper••ed; and they that knew the Law, were dead: And the Men of the Great Sanhedrin, who restored the Law to its old Estate, they found some difference between some Copies; and they followed the agreement of the majority of Copies, according to their knowledge; and in the place that they could not well understand clearly which was the rightest and truest, there they wrote one, and did not Poin•• it; or else they wrote it without, and did not write it within:

That is, in the line; and so they wrote one way in the Line, and another in the Margin.

Now (saith Buxtorf) in that Kimchi saith of the Men of the Great Sanhedrin, that re∣stored the Law to its pristine state, That the one of these words that have a different reading, they did not Point: Doth it not plainly follow then, in his Opinion, that they Pointed the other? Or else how was the not Pointing the one, a Mark to distinguish it from the other? And so by Consequence the Points were then in use.

Capellus Vind. lib. 1. cap. 1. sect. 27. saith, What if he say Kimki here contradicts what he saith elsewhere?

Resp. Then he should prove it: But this he doth not attempt to do.

He objects, The words, And they did not Point it, are not necessarily to be understood of the Great Sanhedrin.

Resp. But they are necessarily to be un∣derstood of them; for none else are spoken of but them only.

Capellus, after all his Cavils, saith, Sed esto fuerit & Kimchi, & Aben Ezra, & Auctor Cosri, in ea sententia Esdram Auctorem esse & Inventorem Punctorum; id nihil Officit Sententiae meae ••orum enim testimonia eo tantum Adduxi, ut probarem Mosem non esse eorum Auctorem:

But be it so, that Kimchi, Aben Ezra, and the Author of Cosri, were of that Opinion, That Ezra was the Author and Inventor of the Points; that nothing hurts my Position; for I brought their Testimony to this intent only, that I might prove that Moses was not their Author.

Resp. And this we do not here debate: In vain then are all his Cavils, and all the Evidences for the Time, Place and Persons, when, where, and by whom the Points were invented; for they have no other, and no other doth Elias bring to prove the Masorites of Tiberias Pointed the Text. And yet Capellus Arcanum, cap. 1. sect. 2, 3. cap. 2. sect. 2. cap. 3. And after him Wal∣ton, Proleg. 3. Consider. pag. 228. stick not to affirm that Elias hath proved this; and therefore, whilst our hand is in, we'll produce one place more out of Kimchi, to shew his Mind about the Authors of the Points; which Elias hath curtail'd, to signifie the Sound, and not the Shape, but very unfairly: the place is in Miklol, pag. mihi 96.

For also our Rabbi's, of happy memory (saith Kimchi,) when they say, that it is necessary to give a space be∣tween words that are joyned together, (that is, apt to sound as one word, though they are two,) as Gnal-lebabeka, be Col-lebabe••em; they do not speak this, to make a Stop or Pause, so as that Makkaph should not be put between the two Lameds, as it is put: But although that he do read them with Makkaph, yet he should put such a space between them, in pronouncing them, that it may sound as if he read two Lameds: For behold, Becol-lebabkem, Becol is pointed with Kamets, because of Makkaph; and if it were read without Makkaph, it should be pointed with Holem: But this our Rabbins, of happy memory, do not say; as if there∣by they intended to change the Vow∣els which were given to Moses on Sinai.

So that here he speaks of the Shapes of the Points, Cholem, Kamets, and Makkaph: And saith, They were given of Moses on Sinai, and must not be changed there∣fore.

4. The Author of Tsak Sephataim considered.

The last Testimony of Elias, is in these words of the Author of Tsak Sephataim:

We must know (saith the Author) that the Punctation was given at Sinai; not that the Tables were Pointed, but as the Holy Blessed God spake the Holy Tongue, those that heard it, did understand all the Motions and Sounds, little and great, even exactly as they were pronounced out of the Mouth, whether it was hard or gentle; so they could discern out of the Mouth of him that read, between A Ka∣mets and A Pathak, between E Tsere and E Segol, and between O Cholem and O Ka∣mets Kataph; and between V with Vau, and V without Vau; and I with Iod, and I without Iod, &c. Masoret Hammaso∣ret, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 2.

Now seeing neither Elias, nor yet Ca∣pellus, do inferr from hence, either that Esra did not Point the Text, or that the Masorites, A. D. 500. did Point it, we need say no more about it, and therefore shall draw our Conclusions from the Pre∣mises.

The Inferences from the Silence of the Iews, and the Insufficiency of the Evidence for the Novelty of the Points.

First, then, we say, If the Punctation were invented and placed, A. D. 500. or since to the Text, by the Jews, as they say it was, then without doubt the Jews would have frequently taken notice of it, being a thing so much for their Honour.

But there is not one Iew that taketh any notice of it, Elias only excepted; and all those he alledgeth, appear to be silent in the Case.

Therefore the Points were not invent∣ed, and placed to the Text by the Jews, A. D. 500. or since that time.

This Argument they cannot refuse, seeing it is of the same kind with what they rely most upon: For they say, if the Points were before A. D. 500. then certainly the Talmudick Iews would have taken notice of it; and therefore we may well say, if the Points were since A. D. 500, the succeed∣ing Jews must needs have taken notice of it; which they have not done, though the Commentators and Grammarians had better ability, and more frequent occasion so to do, than the Talmudists had of Ez••a's Pun∣ctation.

Again, We will not believe the Points were placed by the Masorites of Tiberias, A. D. 500. or since that time; because the Evidence thereof is insufficient, and mute. For,

That Opinion doth not deserve to be em∣braced, the Evidences whereon it is built be∣ing destroyed, and discovered to be insuffi∣cient, and totally silent in the case.

But such is the Opinion, That the Points were Invented by the Masorites of Tiberias, A. D. 500. For all the Evidence that Elias and his Followers bring to prove the Time, Place and Persons, when, where, and by whom the Points were invented, is no more than a few Expressions of the Rab∣bins, in Commendation of the Skill and Ac∣curacy of the Masorites of Tiberias, in the Pro∣nu••ciation of the Hebrew Tongue, and in ex∣amining the Punctation; which say not one word that the Masorites invented or placed the Punctation, or that the Masorites they speak of lived A. D. 500.

And thus have we finished the First thing that we undertook to discuss; having at large examined the Evidences that are brought for the Novelty of the Points, and proved them to be against their late and Novel Invention.

The Second Part of the First Part of this Discourse.

Consisting of Arguments against the Novelty of the Points, discovering the Improba∣bility and Impossibility of their Novel Invention.

CPAP. VII. The Improbability of the Time and Place assigned for the Invention of the Points.

WE are now to prove, That it is very unlikely the Punctation was invented and placed to the Text by the Jewish Masorites of Tiberias, A. D. 500. which may be made to appear from several Consi∣derations.

FIRST, From the several Circumstances of that People of the Jews, at and before A. D. 500. in the Land of Iudeah, which render them very unfit for such an Under∣taking, then and there, as the Puncta∣tion is.

Now these Circumstances relate to the state, either, (1.) Of their Learning, and its decrease at that time, as Buxtorf de∣scribes it in his Tiberias. Or, (2.) Of their Civil and Temporal Calamities, at and be∣fore that time, as Dr. Owen relates them. Vid. Considerations, pag. 224.

First, As to the state wherein their Jewish Learning stood at that time, it was briefly this:

First, The Jewish Historians have kept the Succession of their Learned Men for a Thousand Years, from the time of our Saviour; and by their Account, as well as all other History of those Times, there remained neither Learning, nor Learn∣ed Men of any Eminency, in Iudeah, any longer than A. D. 340, or thereabouts; for about the Year of Christ, 340. in the Per∣son of R. Hillel, ceased the Promotion to the Dignity of Rabbi in the Land of Israel, Tsemach David, fol. 47. And if the Dignity ceased, 'tis unlikely the Profession should flourish any longer; and from that time and onward they give us an Account of their Learning and Learned Men in Ba∣bylon.

Secondly, Seeing the Jewish Writers have been so carefull to preserve the History of the Mishna, of the Ierusalem and Babylon Talmuds, it is very unlikely they should pass over so great and glorious an Invention as was this of the Authors of the Punctation, in so deep silence, had there been any such. And the rather, because,

Thirdly, The Jews flourished at that time in Babylon, whilst those of Palestine were

very low; and therefore 'tis most impro∣bable to imagine that the Wealthy and Famous Babylonian Jews should leave the eternal Praise of this Work to the poor Jews of Tiberias o••ly. And that because,

Fourthly, The Jews Talmud of Babylon hath not only obscured, but even extinguished that of Ierusalem; so that the Jews, to this day, are governed by the Babylonian Talmud. It is therefore very unlikely that any such Masoretick Curiosity as might ob∣lige all their Nation, should not have the Honour drawn to those of Babylon also.

Fifthly, It is very unlikely, that what required the Approbation of the whole Nation, should be so silently imposed on them all by some Men of Tiberias, at such a time, when for that present, and many hundred years after, the flourishing Schools of the Jews were at Babylon.

Elias Levita confesseth the Masorites were of divers Ages, as in pag. ••••3. And the truth is, the Masorites were Hundreds, and Thou∣sands, for many years, one Generation after another; and we know not the time of their be∣ginning, nor the time of their ending.

How likely then is it to be, that those of Tiberias, A. D. 500. must invent and place all the Punctation; when all he brings to prove it, is no more than this, That some Rabbins commend the Skill and Accu∣racy of the Masorites of Tiberias; but proves not what time those Masorites of Tiberias lived in, whether A. D. 500. or before.

Secondly, As to the state of the Jewish Nation, with respect to their Calamities, at and before A. D. 500. rendring them unfit for such a work as the Punctation; which requireth such Leisure, Ability and Learning, as is only produced under a prosperous state.

Now these are briefly the Scenes of their Misery, before A. D. 500.

First, From A.D. 68. until A.D. 72. were hundreds of thousands of Jews destroyed, as the Translator of Eusebius reckons up out of Iosephus, (Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 8.) And that the Captives, at the taking of Ierusalem, were Ninety seven thousand. And the number of all that died during the Siege within Ierusalem, were Ten hundred thou∣sand. (Vid. Iosephus's Wars, lib. 7. cap. 17.)

Secondly, Another Scene of Misery was under Adrian, A. D. 136. (Euseb. Chron. ad Ann. 136.)

Of this Euseb. Hist. lib. 4. cap. 6. saith,

When the Jewish Rebellion waxed vehe∣ment and grievous, Ruffus, Lieutenant of Iudeah, being sent with a great Power from the Emperour, forthwith slew an innumerable multitude of Men, Women and Children, destroying their Regions and Countreys.

(With a Destruction, saith Dr. Owen, seeming equal to that of Jerusalem under Titus Vespasianus.)

This was most violent at the City Bitter, not far from Ierusalem, and belonging to it; which when taken, and Barchocheba their Seducer destroyed,

This whole Na∣tion (says Eusebius) was banished, and ge∣nerally the whole Countrey of Ierusalem, by the Laws, Decrees and Appointment of Adrian: So that by his Commandment it was not lawful for these silly Souls to behold their Native Soyl; no, not afar off, from the top of an Hill. This City (viz. Ierusalem,) then, to the utter Ruine of the Jewish Nation, and the manifold Overthrow of the ancient Inhabitants, being brought to Confusion, began to be inhabited of strange Nations; and after that it was subdued to the Roman Empire, the Name was quite changed; for unto the Honour of the Conquerour Elias Adria∣nus, it was called Elia.

By this Second Desolation, (as Dr. I. O. observes) they were brought very low, made weak and con∣temptible; unspeakably diminished in their Num∣bers, and driven into obscurity all the World over.

Now (saith Dr. I. O. pag. 224.) that there was formerly a School, and Learned Men at Tiberias, is granted; Ierom hired one Learned from thence: But that they continued there in any Esteem, Number, or Reputation, unto the time designed by our Authors for this Work, is not made to appear from any History of Jews or Christians: Yea, it is certain, that about the time mentioned, the chiefest flourish∣ing of the Jewish Doctors was at Babylon, and some other Cities in the East, where they had newly compleated their Talmud, the Great Pandect of the Jewish Laws, as themselves every where declare. That any Persons considerably learned were then in Tiberias, is a meer Conjecture; and it is most improbable, considering what Destruction had been made of them at Diocaesaria and Tiberias, about the Year of Christ 352. by Gallus, at the Command of Constantius, (Socrates Scholasticus, lib. 2. cap. 27.) by whom the Jews were over∣thrown in Battel, and the City Diocaesaria laid level with the Ground. Now that there should, after all these Destructions of the Jews, be such a Collection of them, so Learned, so Authorized, as to invent this Work, and impose it on all the World, no Man once taking notice that any such Persons ever were, is beyond all belief, pag. 224.

Object. 1. Capellus answereth, First, He is not precise, when, where, and by whom the Points were invented.

Resp. Then he should not insist on those words of Aben Ezra, [From them we have all the Punctation;] nor should he so oft con∣tend for it, and suppose it proved.

Object. 2. Capellus saith, They might come from all Parts to Tiberias.

Resp. This is said, without and against all History or Testimony of those Times.

2. But the Argument is, That so Noble a Work is not mentioned in History: And he does not attempt to prove it is.

Object. 3. He saith, Yet there may be some one learned Man or other there, to begin this Work unobserved.

Resp. But how could the private Work of one Rabbi be forthwith embraced by all the World that receive the Scriptures? And placed through all Bibles, and yet no notice taken of the Author in the History of those Times?

Object. 4. But there were Schools at Tibe∣rias, A. D. 374.

Resp. 1. And yet there might be none by A. D. 500.

2. And if there were Schools then, yet no History saith they pointed the Bible.

Object. 5. Jerom hired a Jew from Tibe∣rias, learned in the Tongue, who died A. D. 400.

Resp. 1. There might be a learned Jew there, and yet no School there.

2. There might be a School, A. D. 400. and yet none A. D. 500.

3. Or if there were a School, still they might not be in a condition to be able to Point the Bible.

Object. 6. Iewish Histories are late, fabu∣lous, and to be suspected.

Resp. Unless they are for Capellus: But what's this to the Point? We say there's no History takes any notice of these things, and they are the Dreams of Elias and Capel∣lus; which we have no reason to em∣brace, were the Jewish History worse than it is.

Object. 7. Why was there no History of the Tiberian Masorites Reforming or Correcting the Punctation, as well as of their being the Au∣thors of it?

Resp. 1. There was more need to have the Authors who de novo Pointed all the Bible, to be very well known and approved too, before their Work was universally received, than there was need of having those who did only Collate and Compare the Copies that were received, to be so much known. But,

Secondly, There is notice taken of the Skill and Accuracy of the Masorites of Ti∣berias, about the Correcting the Puncta∣tion, though there be none about their being Authors of the Punctation; as was observed from the Testimony of Aben Ezra, and Others.

Object. 8. 'Tis not strange, that the first Inventors of Noble Arts have been unknown; as the Vse of the Load-stone, the Mariners-Com∣pass, Bells, Guns, Printing; the Greek Accents; the Stops, such as Comma, Co∣lon, &c. the New Greek and Latin Let∣ters, &c..

Resp. 1st. Our Wonder is not barely, That the Author of this Noble Work of the Punctation is unknown: But our Won∣der is, That if they were known to be the Masorites of Tiberias, A. D. 500. as Elias saith they were, that all the World should receive it from them, and yet no History give any Account of them. And,

2dly. If, as Capellus fancieth, it were 500 Years in composing, 'tis the more a Wonder, that none of these Artists, for Five hundred Years successively, should be taken notice of, and yet their Work uni∣versally received, as they did compleat it gradatim.

3dly. His Instances are not to our Point; for our Reasons do principally shew who they were not, rather than who they were: And our Arguments tend to shew, that whoever invented them, whether the Au∣thors were known or unknown, 'tis very unlikely that the Masorites of Tiberias, A. D. 500. were the Authors.

4thly. Men are more ready to receive a Gift in the dark, than they are to Obey, without knowing who Commands them, and what is Commanded them: The Arts instanced in, are of real profit and advan∣tage; and who refuseth their Profit till they know the Author? Nay, many are so un∣grateful, as to forget their Master, and would be thought to be the Authors of what they have learnt from Others: But the Punctation renders the Scripture to be a Law, a Rule of Obedience; and all Men will know who commands them, before they will obey; and will see what 'tis they are commanded too.

Object. 9. Capellus saith, The Vsefulness of it might introduce it.

Resp. Then were the Jews better than Capellus would have had them; for he wants to be rid of it, that he may have room for his Critical Amendments of the Text: However, it remains very improbable, that it was Invented at the time and place assigned for it, a•• we have shewed; which was the business of this Chapter.

CHAP. VIII. The Improbability of the Persons to whom the Invention of the Points is assigned, manifested from several Considerations. First, From the Nature and Principles of the Masorites of Tiberias, the supposed Authors of them, compared with the Nature of the Punctation it self.

THE Iewish Masorites are said to be the Authors of the Points: But this, we say, is very improbable, if not impossible to be; which appears, by comparing the Punctation it self with these Masorites.

The Punctation is certainly a most Divine and Excellent thing, and what was far abov•• the Wit of Man to make since Ezra's time: Nothing less than the Infallible Influence of the same Spirit by which the Scriptures were first given forth, being able to produce the certain sence of all the most obscure Pro∣phecies, and difficult places of Scripture, as we shall manifest in the Second Part: We are here only to enquire who, and what kind of Men these Masorites were, and how they could be thought meet or able for such a Work; an Account hereof being already given to our hands by Dr. I. O. on the Integrity of the He∣brew,

&c. pag. 240, 241, 242. And by Dr. Light••oot, in his Centuria Chorograph. We need only collect in brief the Sub∣stance of them.

First,

Men they were, (if any such were, saith Dr. I. O.) who had not the Word of God committed to them in a peculiar manner, as their Fore-Fathers had of old, being no part of his Church or People; but were only outwardly Possessors of the Letter, without just Right or Title to it: utterly uninte∣rested in the Promise of the Communi∣cation of the Spirit, which is the Great Charter of the Churches Preservation of Truth, Isa. 59.21.

Secondly,

Men so remote from a right understanding of the Word or Mind of God therein, that they were desperately engaged to oppose his Truth, in the Pooks which themselves enjoyed in all Matters of Importance, unto the Glory of God, from the beginning to the end∣ing: The Foundation of whose Religion was Infidelity, and one of their chief Fundamentals an Opposition to the Go∣spel.

Thirdly,

Men under the special Curse of God, and his Vengeance, upon the ac∣count of the Blood of his dear Son.

Fourthly,

Men all their days feeding themselves with vain Fables, and mis∣chievous Devices against the Gospel, la∣bouring to set up a New Religion un∣der the Name of the Old, in despite of God.

Fifthly,

Men of a profound Ignorance in all manner of Learning and Know∣ledge, but only what concerned their own Dunghil Traditions; as appears in their Stories, wherein they make Pirrhus, King of Epirus, help Nebuchadnezzar against Ierusalem; with innumerable the like Fopperies

Sixthly,

Men so addicted to such mon∣strous Figments, as appears in their Tal∣muds, as their Successors of after Ages are ashamed of, and seek to palliate what they are able; yea, for the most part, Idolaters and Magicians.

And to the same purpose, Dr. Lightfoot, in his Cent. Chorograph. (speaking of this Opinion, That the Masorites pointed the Text,) saith,

I do not admire the Jews Impudence, who found out that Fable; I admire Christians Credulity, who ap∣plaud it: Recount, I pray, the Names of the Tiberians, from the first Foundation of a University there, to the Expiring there∣of, and what do you find but a sort of Men, being mad with, or above the Pha∣risees, bewitching and bewitched with Tra∣ditions, Blind, Crafty Raging; Pardon me if I say Magical and Monstrous? What Fools, what Sots, as to such a Divine Work! Read over the Talmud of Ierusalem: Consider how R. Iudah, R. Chanina, R. Chajia, Bar, Ba, R. Iochanan, R. Ionathan, and the rest of the great Doctors among the Tiberians, do behave themselves: How seriously they do of nothing? How childish they are in serious things? How much Deceitfulness, Froth Venom, Smoak, nothing in their Disputations, &c. If you can believe the Points of the Bible to proceed from such a School, believe also all their Talmuds: The Pointing of the Bible savours of the Work of the Holy Spirit, not of Wicked, Blind, and Mad Men.

— Thus far Dr. Lightfoot. This Account is full and sufficient at present; we shall only consider the Exceptions to this Argument.

Object. Tis said, They do not ascribe the Punctation to the Masorites, but only suppose they placed the Shapes of the Points, &c, accord∣ing as they had received the true Sound of all the Punctation, by Tradition, Vse and Custom, by which they might have been able to Point it truly. (Vid. Considerator Considered, pag. 200, 206, 207, 210, 211, 212.)

Resp. (1.) We have briefly shewed al∣ready in our PROEMIVM, that this was impossible to be done; for multitudes of the Shapes are not distinguished by the Sounds at all.

(2.) No memory of Man can once re∣ceive or take up so much as the very Anomalies of the Punctation: How much less all the Pauses, and the whole Puncta∣tion? And how could all this be kept, from Age to Age, without Points, when now we have Points, no one is able to Point the Bible without a Copy? The Rabbins acknowledge they have lost the knowledge of the sence and meaning of many words in the Bible, in that time; and how was it possible they could pre∣serve the true Sound of every Point in the Bible, when they had so lost their Tongue, and the true Sence and Meaning of many words in it?

2dly. We Answer them out of their own Objections: For they say,

First, The LXX. and Chaldee Paraphrase, read otherwise than we or the Masorites do read; which they do not, as to the Shape, but the Sound of the Points, &c. and hence conclude the Points were not in their time.

Now we may better conclude from hence, that the Sounds which the Masorites expres∣sed by the Punctation, were not in the time of the LXX. or the Chaldee Paraphrase; but since their time they are very greatly al∣tered.

Again: When Buxtorf says, as to the Chaldee Paraphrase,

That that on the Law, agrees well with our Punctation; but those on the Prophets, go off most from the pre∣sent Punctation:

Capellus replyes, The Reason of that might be, because, First, They were more used to read the Law, and it was written plainer; but it was more difficult to understand, and so rightly to sound, the words of the Prophets being more dark.

Resp. But if the true Sound had been kept, there had been no difference; and

yet we see the present Punctation does all alike true; but if through such diffi∣culty in the Prophets they had missed the right Pronunciation, and lost it in many places by that time, it was then impossible it should be preserved to the time of the Masorites, so pure and entire as it is pre∣tended.

In vain therefore is the Succession of their Learned Men alledged, and that the Bible was constantly read by them: For 'tis known, the Language had ceased to be vulgarly spoken or understood for a Thousand Years; the LXX, &c. (as themselves say) had lost the Pronunciation long before. The Learn∣ed Men of each Countrey differed from each other in the Sound of Vowels and Letters too, as those of Galilee, &c. in Christ's time: And we see, where a Language is vulgar, the Pronunciation and Sound used in one Age and County, differs from that of another, as here in England, &c. And so in Scotland, though the Scots do read our English Bible, yet they give it a very different Tone or Sound than we do; how much more when a Language is lost, the first part of it that departs, is the Tone or Sound: It is fabulous therefore to ima∣gine that that part should continue longest, which always is gone first; and to suppose that a few Priests, that esteemed the Mishna above the Bible, should or could preserve the true Sound of the Text for a Thousand Years; when nothing is more unconstant in all Nations, than the sameness of sound∣ing their Vowels, and wherein every Age and County makes an Alteration.

So that after all these Evasions, if the Ma∣sorites invented the Shapes of the Points, &c. the Sounds could have no better Original than the Shapes have, or their variable Custom, which is equivalent; and the Pun∣ctation it self, on that account, could have no better Foundation than their Reputa∣tion: Which how unfit they were for such a Work, and how unsuitable the Work it self (to wit, the Punctation) is to such Work∣men, let all Men judge.

CHAP. IX. The Improbability of those Persons Pointing the Text, to whom the Invention thereof is assigned, further manifested from the Nature of the Masora, and the Design of their Masoretick Observations in General: And in Particular, from the Nature of their Notes on the Verses of the Bible.

HAving discovered the Improbability of the Opinion of the Novelty of the Points, from the Insufficiency of the Evi∣dence that is brought for the same, from the Silen••e of the Jews about the Matter; and from the Improbability of the Time and Place assigned by this Opinion for their In∣vention; as also of the Persons compared with the Nature of the Punctation it self: We are now to consider the Improbability of the Persons to whom the Invention of the Points is ascribed, they being suppo∣sed to be the Masorites, from the Nature of the Masora, and their Notes on it.

Now these Masorites are the Authors of the Masora, or the Masoretick Notes and Observations on the Text of the Old Te∣stament; which is their Work, and all that is left concerning them whereby they may be known; so that such as this their Work is, such are they themselves; and no otherwise can we conjecture of or concern∣ing them, but only according to and by this their Work, the Masora.

Our Second Reason therefore, for the Im∣probability of the Persons to whom the Invention of the Points is assigned, is ta∣ken from the Consideration of the Nature of the Masora, which is their Work; and the Design of their Masoretick Observations on the Text of the Old Testament, compared with the Punctation, and the attempt of intruding the same upon the Scripture; and this in General we say, and shall prove by an Induction of particular Instances throughout all the Parts of the Masora.

That the Masora, and all the Parts of it, consists only of Critical Notes or Ob∣servations about the Text of the Old Testa∣ment, and the Form of writing the same as they had found it received by the Jews in their time, with this single end or de∣sign, That no Persons whatsoever in time to come, should presume to make the least Alteration of the Text, on any Pretence, or for any Reason whatever: (And hence the Masora is said to be Sig Letorah, An Hedge to the Law:) And this shall be made appear by Instances throughout all the Parts of the Masora. On the other hand, the Punctation determins the sence of all the Scripture; it speaks what that makes it say, and nothing else: This might be placed by Ezra well enough, while the right Sound was known, and Men divinely inspired were among them: But for the Post-Talmudick Masorites to presume to in∣troduce the Shapes of innumerable signifi∣cant Points upon the Text, thereby de∣termining the sence of every word in the Bible, is a thing more contrary and oppo∣site to the whole Nature and only Design of all the Masora, and of all their Masore∣tick Notes, than ever was done: And there∣fore; it is altogether improbable that the Masorit••s, or the Authors of the Masora, should be the Inventors of the Punctation, and the Intruders of the same upon the Text.

Now to prove the Truth of what is here asserted in General, about the Nature and Design of the Masora, we shall produce In∣stances out of all the Parts of the Masora; the very Proposal whereof will evince what we affirm, That as they do no where own themselves to be the Authors of the Points, so their work was only to observe what

de facto they found the Text to be; and their only design thereby, was to preserve it from being altered in any thing.

As to the matter of the Masora, wherein it consisteth, Buxtorf in Tib. cap. 12. saith, They are Critical Annotations concerning the Hebrew Text of Sacred Scripture.

The Text is considered, (1.) As to the Verses, (2.) The Words. And (3.) The Letters of it.

First, As to the Verses.

(1.) The Verses are all numbred through every Book of the Bible, and the middle Verse of each Book is noted. Also the Verses in every Section of the Law, and of every Book of Scripture, are numbred by them∣selves: As for Instance,

Genesis hath 1534 Verses: The mid∣dle Verse of it is in cap. 27. ver. 40. And thou shalt live by thy Sword.

Exodus hath 1209 Verses: The mid∣dle Verse of it is in cap. 22. ver. 28.

〈 math 〉〈 math 〉

All the Pentateuch 5845. Tho' the precise numb. is question'd.—And so of the rest. Vid. Buxtorf. Tib. and Parkhurst's Canon of Scripture, part 1. pag. 88. According to which Account the Masorites reckon the Verses in all the Bible to be 23206. Hence they are called Sopherim Numberers, and are herein a Hedge to the Law, that not a Verse should be lost: So that in this part of the Masora their Work is only to note what they found the Text to be de facto. And (2.) Their Design is to preserve it entire from Alteration. And (3.) We may ob∣serve, that the Verses were distinguished before their time, or they could not have been numbred by them, as being found by them so to be.

Secondly, The Verses are considered with respect to some Words and Letters that are found in them.

As for Instance; one Verse is noted, consisting of 42 Words, and 160 Letters; and that is Ier. 21. 7. Which Note, if they had made the Verses themselves, had been no very wise Observation.

And they note two Verses only in the Law that begin with the l••tter Samech, viz. Exod. 32.8. Numb. 14.19. And two Ver∣ses end with Samech, viz. Gen. 32.14. Numb. 19.33. And there are two Verses, they say, wherein Vajomar is four times used, viz. Gen. 22.7. 1 King. 20.14. with many such like: The Nature and Design of which, is, as we have observed on the number of the Verses, to observe what they sound the Text de facto to be; and to pr••serve it from Alteration, the Verses themselves being distinguished before their time; for 'twere absurd to make such Notes on Verses of their own making.

CHAP. X. The Improbability of the Masorites Pointing the Text, further discovered, from the Na∣ture of their Notes on the Keri U Ketib, and the seven kinds of them.

AS the Masorites consider the Text, as to the Verses of it; so they consider it with respect to the words of it likewise. And their Observations herein also are only about what they found the Text de facto to be, with design to preserve it from any Alteration in time to come; which appears by a view of the several sorts or kinds of Observations about the words of the Text of the Old Testament.

The first sort of Observations about the words of the Text, is concerning their genuine and true Writing and Reading, called Keri, and Ketib: These Elias reckons in all to be 848; viz. 65 in the Law, 454 in the Prophets, and 229 in the Hagio∣graphy. But Buxtorf, and Others, reckon more of them.

The Antiquity of these Keri and Ketib are not only expresly owned to be as an∣cient as Ezra's time, by R.D. Kimchi, in Pref. on Ioshua; Abarbinel on Ieremiah, and the rest of the Jews, but also by Elias Levita himself, and therefore needs not be here proved.

We shall therefore, for our present pur∣pose, only consider the several sorts of the Keri and Ketib, as the Masorites have sort∣ed them, and summed them up under each sort severally by themselves.

Now these Keri and Ketib, Elias Levita hath divided into Seven Sorts or Kinds, as the Masorites have summed them up, and noted how they found them, that they might not be alter••d hereafter. (Vid. Elias in Maamar 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or his First Section.)

The First kind is of Letters that are read in words, and not written; and writ∣ten in words, and not read: And these are mostly the Letters jehu, a, h, u, j, which are so found at the beginning, middle and end of words: Only it is to be observed, saith Elias, that Vau and Iod are not to be found so when they are quiescent in the midst of a word; that is to say, Vau after Holem, and Shurek, and Iod, after Chirek and Tsere; for these are in the Order of Chesarim and Melaim, viz. words Defective and Full. But Vau is often written, and not read after Kamets, or Kateph Kamets: As 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Jos. 9.6, 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isai. 18.4. and many the like. And Elias saith, that the letter that is written, but not read, there that letter is not Pointed in the word wherein it is written; as Ier. 50.8. from the Land of the Chaldeans, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, They came forth. And also Ezek. 46.9. there

Iod is written, but not read: As the Keri saith, Iod is not read: And so Baal 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, HE is not read, saith the Keri, therefore it is not Pointed in the Ketib, Eccles. 10.20.

And as to the keri u lo ketib, Elias observeth, That all the words in which a letter is read, but not written, that letter is Pointed in the line without writing the letter at all; and the same letter is written in the Keri, or Margin, without any Point at all; as Lam. 5.7. Our fathers sinned, are not, we, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the Keri, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 And they are not, and we, &c. And of such as these there are twelve in number.

Now these Unpointed Letters they ei∣either made so, or found them so: If them∣selves made them so, their Notes thereon were very silly, and would not have been valued by any without Reasons alledged for the same, having Pointed all the rest: And if they found them so written, as no doubt but they did, then the Points were in being before their time.

Moreover, had they ventured to Point all the Bible, they would never have scrupled either to have Pointed these individual Let∣ters, or have left them out of the Text. But the truth is, by the not Pointing these Letters, the keri and ketib of them is pre∣served, which hath been kept since Ezra's time; and therefore the means whereby they are preserved, (and that is, the Pointing the one, and not the other, hath been as ancient likewise, as R. D. Kimchi in Pref. on Ioshua observes.)

Secondly, The Second kind of Keri u Ke∣tib, is of Letters that are changed one into another; and these are mostly the Vowel Letters, jehu, a, h, u, j: As for Instance, there are fifty two words that are written with Iod at the beginning of the word, and read as if with Vau, as in Iob 10.20. Ia∣chedal and Iashit in the Ketib; and the Keri, 'tis Vachedal, and Vashit. And there are Fifty six words contrary; that is, with Vau in the line, and Iod in the Keri; as in Psal. 10.10. 'tis written Videke and Vashuak, and read Iidekeh and Iashuak. And there are seventy words written with Iod in the midst of words, and read Vau; and all these Iods are Pointed with Holem, or Shurek; when 'tis written with Holem, then the Holem is Pointed upon the letter which goeth before Iod; as in Psal. 77.11. Az••ir is read Ezcor; and in Gen. 25.23. But Shu∣rek is Pointed in the midst of Iod, in Gen. 24.33. and in Num. 1.16. And so in the end of words, as in Ier. 6.25. But words that are written with He in the end, and read with Vau, they are Pointed with Kib∣bu••. in the letter before He; as in Lev. 21.5. They shall not make baldness, &c. And Deut. 21.7. And there are fourteen such. And saith Elias, There are many letters Ehevi, Iehu, a, h, u, i, that change the one into the other.

And there are other letters that change one into another; but they are only of letters that are either, First, Of like Shape; as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 final, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Or else, Secondly, of like Sound; as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. As for Example of all these, First, There are eleven words writ∣ten 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as in Esther 3.4. And three, on the contrary, are writen 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as in Prov. 21.29. Ezra 8.14. Where also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as also in Ier. 2.20. And there are four words written with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and read with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as in Ier. 31.40. And of words that change 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 final; as Iak Nashagnar read Iad, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Song 1.17. ult. Of these are four. And so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 1 Sam. 14.32. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Eccles. 12.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ios. 3.16. And of these are six, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Isa. 65.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 1 Sam. 17.7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are two. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 2 Sam. 21.18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Isa. 66.17. and are three and two contrarily, 2 Sam. 17.12. 1 King. 19.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are two, as Ier. 49.30. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ezek. 3.15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 into 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ezek. 25.7. & 47.13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 not is put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to him in fifteen places, say the lesser Ma∣sora on 1 Sam. 2.2. that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is fifteen times writ for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, viz. (1) Exod. 21.8. (2) Lev. 11.21. Here the greater Masora reckons them up. (3) Lev. 25.30. (4) 1. Sam. 2.3. (6) 2 King. 8.10. (7) Ezra 4.2. (8) Iob 13.15. (9) Iob 41.12. (10) Prov. 19.7. (11) Prov. 26.2. (12) Psal. 100.3. (13) Psal. 139.16. (14) Isa. 9.3. (15) Isa. 63.9.

Now certainly, had these Men ventured to place all the Punctation, they would have made bold to take the letter that best agreed with the sence of the place; and left the other, as most Translations do, who dare not Point the Bible, this were to strain at a Gnat, and swallow a Camel: Not to alter one Vowel Letter, and yet place all the Punctation. And the same may be said of all the other sorts of Keri u Ketib.

Thirdly, The Third kind of Keru u Ketib is of letters transposed.

There are words wherein one letter is written beyond its place out of Rule, and read in its due place by Rule; and these are sixty two, but not one of them in the Law.

Fifty one of them are of the letters Iehu, a, h, u, i, as Iudg. 16.26. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with the first Iod transposed; so Iosh. 6.13. and in 2 King. 25.16. (But I find it not so.) And there are eleven words wherein other letters are transposed, besides a, h, u, i; as, (1) Eccles. 9.4. (2) 1 Sam. 27.8. (3) 2 Sam. 15.28. (4) 2 Sam. 20.14. (5) 1 King. 7.45. (6) Ezek. 42.16. (7) Prov. 23.26. (8) Ezra 2.46. (9) Ezra 4.4. (10) Ezra 8.14, 17. (11) 1 Chron. 27.29.

Of these sixty two, the final Masora di∣recteth to the place where they are reckoned up under Caph •••• Ketib.

What was said under the former kinds of the Keri and Ketib], may be said under

this and every other of the seven kinds that follow; viz. That the Masorites would ne∣ver have observed and kept these little Ni∣ceties as a Law upon their Posterity, not to add, alter, or rectifie so much as a Letter, where our Printers, and all Translators, make no scruple to do as the sence directs, if they had added all the Punctation.

Fourthly, The Fourth kind of Keri and Ketib, is about placing the letter He 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: That is to say, where there are two words so joyned, that the first word taketh for its last letter the first letter of the second word, being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He; or on the contrary, the second word taking to it self for its first letter the last letter of the foregoing word. And, First, Where the first word takes to it self the first letter of the following word, being 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 pointed in the line with Pathak; and in the Keri is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Emphatick, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ha∣jadajah at the beginning of the word: And of these there are three in all, thus written; viz. 2 Sam. 5.2. Iob 38.12. Ezek. 42.9. And in two places 'tis con∣trarily used; that is, the second word taking for its first letter the last letter of the word before it; as 2 Sam. 21. 9, 12. Ezra 4.12. Of this Fourth kind, the final Masora directeth to the summ under Caph on Ketib. And of this Fourth kind, the same may be said as was observed on the Third kind before it.

Fifthly, The Fifth kind of Keri u Ketib, is of perfect words which are written and not read, and read and not written.

First, The words which are read and not written, Elias counts Eight: But the Ma∣sora round the first word of Deuteronomy reckon Ten; viz. (1) Iudg. 20.13. (2) 2 Sam. 8.3. (3) 2 Sam. 16. ult. (4) 2 Sam. 18.20. (5) 2 King. 19.37. (6) 2 King. 19.31. (7) Ier. 31.38. (8) Ier. 50.29. (9) Ruth 3.5. (10) Ruth 3.17.

Secondly, Eight words are written, but not read, as the greater Masora on Ruth 3.13. have collected them; viz. (1) 2 King. 5.18. (2) Ier. 38.16. (3) Ier. 51.3. (4) Ezek. 48.16. (5, 6, 7, 8,) ins four times writ∣ten and not read: (1) Ruth 3.13. (2) 2 Sam. 15.21. (3) 2 Sam. 13.33. (4) Ier. 39.12. The final Masora under Caph on Ketib directeth to the places where the Keri u lo Ketib, and the Ketib u lo Keri are reckoned up. The words written, but not read, have no Point at all; and the words read, but not written, have no Letters, but Points only in the line. So that this sort of Keri and Ketib, as indeed all the rest, are preserved by the help of the Points, and not without them.

And this Keri u lo Ketib, and Ketib u lo Keri, is not only owned by Elias himself to be as ancient as Ezra; but the Talmud it self saith of it, That it was of Moses from Sinai: that is, of Divine Original, and thereby as Ancient as Ezra; and therefore the Points whereby alone it is preserved, must be as Ancient likewise.

Sixthly, The Sixth kind of Keri u Ketib, is of words that are written one word, and read two; or written two words, and read one.

First, Of the words written one word, and read two, are Fifteen, as Elias and the lesser Masora on Gen. 30.11. reckon them up: (1) Gen. 30.11. (2) Exod. 4.2. (3) Isai. 3.15. (4) Ezek. 8.6. (5) Ier. 6.29. (6) Ier. 18.3. (7) Psal. ••0.10. (8) Psal. 55.15. (9) 1 Chron. 9.4. (10) Psal. 123.4. (11) 1 Chron. 27.12. On this 1 Chron. 27.12. the greater Masora reckon up the words foregoing, and the four following: (12) Deut. 33.2. (13) Iob 38.1. (14) Iob 40.6. (15) Neh. 2.13.

Secondly, The words that are written two words, and read but one, are Eight, saith Elias, and the final Masora under Caph in Ke∣tib; and says that they are reckoned up in the greater Masora on 2 Chron. 34.6. as they are; viz. (1) 2 Chron. 34.6. (2) 1 Sam. 9.1. (3) 1 Sam. 24.8. (4) 1 King. 18.5. (5) Lam. 1.6. (6) Lam. 4.3. (7) Isa. 9.7. (8) Isa. 44.24. (9) Iudg. 16.25. Of this kind, the same may be said as was before spoken on the former.

Seventhly, The Seventh kind of Keri u Ketib, is of words that are used for Mo∣desty sake: As, First, Shegel is four times to be read as Shacab, says the final Masora, under Shegel in Shin; and reckons them up in the greater Masora on Isai. 13.16. viz. (1) Deut. 28.30. (2) Isai. 13.16. (3) Ier. 3.2. (4) Zech. 14.2.

Secondly, The word Ophelim is read Te∣chorim five times; as the final Masora men∣tions on Techorim in Teth, and directeth to 1 Sam. 5.12. where they are found, (1) 1 Sam. 5.12. (2) 1 Sam. 5.6. (3) 1 Sam. 5.9. (4) 1 Sam. 6.9. (5) 1 Sam. 6.5. (6) Deut. 28.27. And 1 Sam. 5.11•• 17. 'tis written as 'tis read, as the Masorites observe.

Thirdly, The word Chrihem, their Dung, is read T••oihem; their Excrement; and Seeni∣hem, their Piss, is read Mee regleehem, the Waters of their Feet. As, (1) 2 King. 18.27. (2) Isa. 36.12. (3) 2 King. 10.27. (4) 2 King. 6.25.

Now 'tis very improbable that these Men, who dare not leave out an Immodest word, when there is one Modest in the place of it of the same Antiquity; nor make the least Omission of any one useless letter that they found in a former Copy, and yet cannot tell what it signifies to retain it: It is, I say, very Improbable, that these very Men should dare to Invent and Intrude all the Shapes of the Points, Vowels and Accents, upon the Text of Scripture, whose business is to observe every little difference of a let∣ter or word; and to preserve the same, that no Alteration might be made in time to come.

Again, Elias himself, in Masor. Hammas. Pref. 3. owns the Keri u Ketib to be as an∣cient as Ezra. So doth Kimchi in Pref. on Ioshua; and Abarbinel on Ieremiah: And

the Eight hundred forty eight words are preserved by the help of the Points, as Kimchi Pref. on Ioshua observeth; for the Points under the word in the Line, are not its own, but do belong to the word in the Margin; so that without the Points the Keri and Ketib could not be preserved, but it is preserved as we see: Therefore the Points were as ancient as the time of Ezra, seeing the Keri and Ketib which they pre∣serve, is so ancient. And so Kimchi on Ioshua says, that Ezra, and the Men of the Great Synagogue, put the Keri in the Margin and did not Point it to distinguish it thereby from the word in the line: And as R. Sal. Arcuv••lti saith, cap. 26. The Keri lieth hid in the Points of the Ketib.

And so much for the Original, Nature and Kinds of the Keri u Ketib, and the Masore∣tick Notes thereon.

CHAP. XI. The Improbability of the Masorites Pointing the Text, further discovered from the Nature of their Observations on the words written Full or Defective, called Meleim and Chaserim: And also from their Notes on the Ittur So∣pherim seu ablatio Scribarum; that is, what the Scribes have taken away: And from the Tikkun Sopherim seu correctio scriba∣rum, or the eighteen places amended by the Scribes: And from other Masoretick Notes on the words of the Bible; and their Sibbirin, or Conjectures.

THE Second sort of Masoretick Obser∣vations upon the words of the Text, is about the words that are written Full or Defective; the Original whereof, Elias him∣self, in Pref. 3. with the rest of the Jews, owneth to the Divine, and thereby as an∣cient as Ezra.

The Nature of these words Elias describes in Masoret Hammasoret Dibbur Haroshon, 1. As also doth Buxtorf, in his Tiberias from him; which is this:

Know (saith Elias, that the chief and most of those words which the Masorites observe concern∣ing them, that they are Defective or Full, they are most commonly such words that have Vau or Iod quiescent in the mid∣dle of a word; that is, Vau after Holem or Shurek, and Iod after Chirek or Tsere; and 'tis but a few that they observe de∣fective with Aleph or He: And (saith Elias) I will begin with those that are defective, or wanting Vau with Holem, which are many: Now know (saith he,) that most of the Holems in Scripture want Vau; but yet they do not observe of every Holem in Scripture that is without Vau, that it is defective; nor yet of every Ho∣lem that is with Vau, do they say it is full: Only those words whose manner is to have Holem with Vau most commonly, when they come at any time without Vau, then they observe concerning them, that such a word is defective: And so likewise those words whose manner is to have Holem come most commonly without Vau, then whenever such a word cometh with Vau, they observe concerning such a word, that it is written full: So that (saith Elias) this is a Rule, That only those words which are for the most part written full, they only are said by them to be defective, when they are written defective: And on the other hand, Only those words that for the most part are written defective, when they are written full, concerning them, only it is, That the Masorites observe that such a word is written full.

Now of these Meleim ve Chaserim, or words written ful or defective, the Maso∣rites make innumerable Observations; for they note them where-ever they meet them, which is almost every where. Now what had it been for them to have made them all full or defective, had they Pointed the Text? But they religiously note every place where a word that is usually written full, that is, where the Vowel Letter is added to the Point most commonly, if that word be ever written without the Vowel Letter, they observe concerning it, that it is defective; but dare not make it full, by adding to it the Vowel Letter, though they know it is so written most commonly. Now can any one imagine that these Men did venture to place the whole Punctation, who durst nei∣ther add nor yet omit one single Vowel Letter, where the Use of the word shews it should be added or omitted?

Thirdly, The Third sort of Masoretick Ob∣servations upon the words of the Text, is about the words that are called Ittur sophe∣rim seu ablatio scribarum, or, What the Scribes have taken away, the Antiquity whereof the Talmud it self owneth to be of Divine Original, and Elias doth not deny it so to be. Now these Ittur So∣pherim are five words that might seem as to the sence to have required the letter Vau to signifie And at the beginning of them; but being written without them, are to be read without them. Of these the final Ma∣sora on Ittur under Ain mention four, and direct to Psal. 36.6. where they are reckon∣ed up; viz. (1) Gen. 18.5. (2) Gen. 24.55. (3) Numb. 12.14. (4) Psal. 36.6. (5) Psal. 68.26. Vid. R. Chaim. in Pref. on the Bible.

Now can any think that these are the Men who made so bold with the Text, as to Point all the Scripture of the Old Testa∣ment, and yet did not venture to put a Vau, one Vowel Letter, where the sence seemed to require it; and observed these places, that none might presume to add or alter a Vowel Letter upon their own Judgment, even there where they thought the sence did require it so to be.

Fourthly, The Fourth sort of Masoretick Observations upon the words of the Text, is about the Eighteen places Transposed, called Tikkun sopherim seu correctio scribarum; or, The Amendments of the Scribes; other∣wise called by Aben Ezra, Tikkun Ezra, The Amendments made by Ezra: For Elias, the Talmud, and the Iews, generally own their Divine Original; only Aben Ezra, Iarchi, &c. sometimes say there was no Tikkun; but the Text always was as now it is, and the Masorites curse any that dare alter these places, which they reckon up round the beginning of Numbers. (1) Gen. 18.22. (2) Numb. 11.15. (3) Numb. 12.12. (4) Ier. 2.11. (5) 1 Sam. 3.13. (6) 2 Sam. 16.12. (7) Hos. 4.7. (8) 2 Chron. 10.16. 1 King. 12.16. 2 Sam. 20.1. (9) Ezek. 8.17. (10) Hab. 1.12. (11) Mal. 1.13. (12) Zech. 2.8. (13) Iob 7.20. (14) Iob 32.3. (15) Lam. 3.20. (16) Psal. 106.20. Of these the Masorites say, on Numbers, cap. 1. A Curse shall come upon every one that writes an Accusation against these Tik∣kum Sopherim. And if so, what must they have expected would have befallen them∣selves, had they intruded the whole Pun∣ctation, who esteemed the least part of Scripture to be so compleat and sacred.

Fifthly, There are other sorts of Maso∣retick Observations upon the words of the Text; which manifest likewise that the Authors of such Notes were very unlikely to be the Inventors of the Points and Verses: Such as these:

1. They note the Place or Position of words, as they are found in the beginning or end of a Verse: As in Gen. 1. 2. they say Vehaarets, and the Earth, is eight times at the beginning of a Verse, and the eight places are there collected: But if they had made the Verses, they'd never have made such Notes on their own Invention; for they had other work to do, and 'twas their own Fancy to have them eight times at the beginning, if they made the Verses.

2. They observe also when a Verb is used with one certain Noun, or Preposition, and how often; as how often Amar, said, is joyned with the words El Elohim, unto God, which they found to be nine times: so the Verb Iareh, to fear, is seven times joyned with Eth Elohim, the Lord, as they observe on Gen. 42.18. Certainly the Authors of the Punctation had somewhat else to do, than make such Notes.

3. They observe the signification of the ambiguity of a word, as to its various sences on Gen. 6.11. Gnaleh, a Leaf; the Masora there saith it is six times used to sig∣nifie a Leaf. And why might it not have been six score times in that sence, had they so Pointed it? For it is fixed by the Points to the several sences wherein it is used; for Gnaleh in other places so Pointed, signifieth to Ascend; and if in six places they found it so pointed, and yet signified a Leaf, cer∣tainly the Text must be pointed before such Notes could be made; or they would have made some difference in the Points of Gnaleh to Ascend, and Gnaleh a Leaf, had they Pointed the Text. So Gen. 19.8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ha••l, in eight places signifieth these, and not the Name of God; which in all other places it signifieth as it is so pointed: This they could not observe before the word was Pointed.

Sixthly The Masorites make many Conje∣ctures about the truest Forms of words that seem to be irregular; which they call Sibbirim, or Conjectures; that is, about words that do seem at first view, that they might more conveniently be written otherwise than they are, as to the sence of the place, or usual form of the words; as on Gen. 19.23. the Masorites say there are three places where they think Iatsa is used in the Masculine Gender, when by Grammar-rule it should have been used in the Feminine, being joyn∣ed with a word Feminine; and of this kind are many such, to restrain Persons from altering the least letter of the Text, upon never so great appearance of its being more agreeing to the Nature or Manner of the Language so to be, or Use of the words in Construction with it. Now if notwith∣standing their admirable Skill in the Nature and Use of the Language, they did not dare to alter one Letter or Point, where they thought the Nature and Use of the Lan∣guage required they should; who can ima∣gine they would venture to place all the Punctation? And so much for the Masore∣tick Notes on the words of the Text.

CHAP. XII. The Improbability of the Masorites Pointing the Text, further shewed from the Nature of their Observations on the Letters of the Bible that are found Greater or Lesser than ordina∣ry, or that are Inverted or Suspended, or that are Open or Shut, or extraordinarily Pointed.

AS the Masorites consider the Text, with respect unto the Verses and Words of it; so they do in the next place consider it with respect unto the Letters of it: Which that not one Letter might be lost, they have counted how oft each letter is found in the Bible.

Now as to the Letters, their Observa∣tions respect either, (1.) The Quality: Or, (2.) The Quantity or Number of them.

First, As to their Quality: They consider their different Figure or Shape, where∣ever they are found in an unusual man∣ner. And these are either, (1.) Greater than ordinarily they are: Or, (2.) Lesser than ordinary: Or, (3.) Inverted: Or, (4.) Suspended: (5.) Open or Shut, Or, (6.) Extraordinarily Pointed.

First, As to the Letters that are Greater than ordinary, they only observe that so they are written, that none may bring them into their ordinary form; but they dare not alter them: Whence we may conclude, that these are not the Men that intruded the Punctation upon the Text. Now the Masorites have collected these great Let∣ters both at the beginning of Genesis, and of the First Book of Chronicles, but with some difference: The Great Letters are in these places following. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the word Adam, 1 Chron. 1.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Bereshit, Gen. 1.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in hit Galak, Lev. 13.33. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in achaD, Deut. 6.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Halejovah, Deut. 32.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in gihOn, Lev. 11.42. And so 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Mal. 3.32. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esther 1.6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Iob 9.34. & Eccles. 7.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Numb. 14.17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Psal. 8.16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 29.8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Prov. 1.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Exod. 34.7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Eccles. 12.13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 6.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Dan. 6.20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isa. 56.10. & Deut. 32.4 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Psal. 84.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Exod. 34.14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Cant. 1.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 18.13.

Secondly, The Lesser Letters are those that are lesser than the common Form: And of these there are Thirty three col∣lected Alphabetically by the Masorites in the beginning of Leviticus, and in the be∣ginning of the final Masora, but a little dif∣ferent the one from the other. Now of these Little and Great Letters, both the Talmuds make mention of them, as being before their time, and therefore can be no late Innovation: And they are these: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the word VEIIKRa, Lev. 1.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in HAb, Prov. 30.15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Iob 7.5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Prov. 28.17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gen. 2.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Numb. 25.12. & Psal. 24.4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esther 9.9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Iob 33.9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lam. 2.9. & Numb. 31.24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 32.18. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gen. 23.2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lam. 1.12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Deut. 31.27. & Lev. 6.2. & final Neh. 13.30. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lam. 4.14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 final three times, Isai. 44.14. Ier. 39.13. Prov. 16.28. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nahum 1.3. & Psal. 27.5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Lam. 3.36. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Dan. 6.20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ier. 14.2. & final Iob 16.14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Exod. 32.25. & Gen. 27.47. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as some, Exod. 23.19. & 34.26. say the final Masora; but that on Levit. say, 2 Sam. 21.19. Esth. 9.9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esth. 9.7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Esth. 9. The Name of one of Haman's Sons also.

Now what a small matter had it been for them to have made a letter that was too little, to be as big as his fellows? But this they durst not do, but took this care to prevent any others doing of it after their time: And therefore these are not likely to be the Men that placed the Punctation, see∣ing they did not dare to mend a letter. The like may be said of the Letters Invert∣ed, Suspended, Open, or Shut; which do follow: As,

The Masorites on Num. 10.35. do say there are Nine Verses wherein this Mark 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Nun is found inverted, but they dare not alter them; and they there collect them; as (1) The letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Numb. 10.35. (2) Numb. 11.1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The other seven are in Psal. 107. as ver. 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, & ver. 40. In our Bible Nun is not found inverted in some of these places: But (as Buxtorf saith,) we should seek for them in Masoretick Manuscripts of the Bible. How is it likely the Masorites intruded the Points, who durst not put 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the right way?

Fourthly, They observe that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is final in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Isa. 9.7. And 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is open at the end of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Neh. 2.13. but dare not alter them.

Fifthly, That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is written, Iob 38.1. in the end of the word, as it is usually writ∣ten in the beginning or middle, but alter it not.

Sixthly, The Masora on Iudg. 18.30. say there are four words that have in them a letter suspended or hanged; and they are these: (1) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Iudg. 18.30. which is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: But the second, third and fourth are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as, (2) Psal. 80.14. (3) Iob 38.13. (4) Iob 38.15. The Talmud giveth a Reason why these letters are so written; which sheweth their Ancient Original. Now if the Ma∣sorites durst not put right these letters which appear wrong placed, how can we imagine they placed the Punctation?

Seventhly, The like may be said of their Notes on the Taggin, or little strokes on letters.

Eighthly, There are Fifteen words that have a letter Pointed at the top extraor∣dinarily, not to signifie a Vowel, but some Mystery; as the Point over the last Iod in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: As, (1) Gen. 16.5. The Masora note this to be one of the ten words in the Law that are Pointed, and four in the Prophets, and one in the Ketubim. (2) Gen. 18.9. Hascuni says this Point was in Ezra's time, and placed by Moses: See Bereshit Rabba, R. Solomon, R. Bechai. (3) Gen. 19.33. This Ierom observes, and the Talmudists in Nazer, cap. 4. fol. 23. So doth Tanchuma, Ialkut, Baal Hatturim, Zohar, and Others. (4) Gen. 33.4. (5) Gen. 37.12. (6) Num. 31.39. (7) Num. 9.10. (8) Num. 21.30. (9) Numb. 29.15. (10) Deut. 29.29. (11) 2 Sam. 19.19. (12) Isa. 44.9. (13) Ezek. 46.2. (14) Ezek. 46.22. (15) Psal. 27.13. The Talmudists in Be∣rachoth, cap. 1 fol. 4. give the Reason of this. Hence we observe,

First, That these Points are of great Antiquity, being taken notice of in Zohar, and other ancient Books before the Talmud. And 'tis very unlikely they should be be∣fore the Points, Vowels and Accents, be∣ing of unspeakably less use and necessity; seeing, as Capellus himself acknowledgeth, that the most necessary part of the Puncta∣tion was made first.

Secondly, We observe that the Masorites who made these Notes on the Points, can∣not

be the Authors of the Points themselves, but must be long after them; and if they had been the Authors of them, they must have been long before the Talmud.

CHAP. XIII. The Improbability of the Masorites being the Inventors of the Punctation, more particu∣larly considered from the Nature of the Ma∣soretick Notes on the Punctation, and on all the Parts of it; and more especially on the Anomalies thereof.

THe Masorites have observed all the Ano∣malies that are in all the Parts of the Punctation; which are very many, almost innumerable, and barely observe that so it is: Whereas had they been the Authors of the Punctation, they either needed not have made one Anomalous Point, Vowel, or Accent; but might have made them all uniform and regular; or else could, and 'tis likely would have given some Reason of the Anomalies; which they wholly omit∣ted to do. We shall therefore produce a few of the many Instances of the Anoma∣lies that are in all the Parts of the Puncta∣tion, together with some of their Obser∣vations thereon, that by them it may be judged whether those Masorites placed the Punctation or not.

Now the Punctation consists of Three Parts: (1.) The Vowels. (2.) the Points Dagesh and Mappek. (3.) The Accents; as Buxtorf in his Tiberias, pag. 13. collects some of them, it being endless to men∣tion all.

First, The Anolmalies or Irregularities that are found in the Vowels; as in Gen. 16. ver. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and ver. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, there the Masorites observe that every Shem is writ∣ten with Tsere, except six with Segol, which they there reckon up. Now why should this word be but six times so pointed, of the many hundreds of times it is written? And why in these six places? If they had Pointed the Bible, they could have made these regular, or given us a Reason why they did not so do. Certainly these Notes shew they only observed the Anomalies they found, that none might alter them in time to come. So Gen. 19.2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Hinneh: On this the Masorites say every Hinneh signi∣fying Hen, Behold, is written with Tsere, except this one, which is with Segol. In the places following, the Masorites ob∣serve how oft each word is irregularly used; that is, one Vowel for another in the same word, viz. Exod. 32.1, 6. Exod. 33.3. Lev. 5.22. & 10.19. Numb. 9.2. Deut. 18.17. & 30.4. Iosh. 2.14. 2 Sam. 23.6. Ier. 17.17. cap. 31.33. Ezek. 9.8. Dan. 1.13. Ioel 1.4. Amos 9.13. Hab. 2.17. Zech. 7.14. Psal. 128.3. Prov. 3.12. Eccles. 3.18. cap. 7.28. Isa. 27.12.

Secondly, the Anomalies that are found in the Points Dagesh and Mappik.

(1.) Of Dagesh. 'Tis a general Rule, that the four Gutturals, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, do not admit of Dagesh forte; nor doth the letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Resh for its roughness: Yet contrary to this Rule, the Masorites observe that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hath Dagesh four times, viz. Ezra 8.16. Gen. 43.26. Lev. 23.17. Iob 33.21. And the let∣ter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Resh, they say, hath Dagesh thrice, viz. 1 Sam. 10.24. & 1.6. & 17.25. Song 5.2. Kimchi Miklol, fol. 73. says 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is seven times with Dagesh. (2.) Dagesh is oft used Euphonia gratia, but in some places it cannot be; as in Exod. 15.17. and Deut. 23.11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is sometimes written with Dagesh in Mem, and sometimes without it, as in Psal. 43.2.

(2.) Of Mappik. This hath its use too: As, 1st. In 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Third Pers. Fem. Pron. as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to her. The Masorites observe it is thrice without Mappik, as Num. 32.42. Zech. 5.10. Ruth 2.14. 2dly. They observe there are Eighteen words in Scripture wherein Map∣pik is omitted; as Exod. 2.3. cap. 9.18. The rest are in the final Masora in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 under 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

(3.) The Anomalies that are found in the Accents, with the Masorites Notes thereon, prove they were not the Authors of them; but only observed how the Books were Pointed before their days.

First, Pathak and Segol are commonly changed into Kamets, by the great Pauses, Athnak, Soph, Pasuk, or Silluk: (How then could the Vowels be placed so long before these Accents? as Capellus fancieth.)

Now in some Books sometimes they re∣main, and are not altered by these Ac∣cents: And these places the Masorites do note; as Gen. 21.8. cap. 21.13. cap. 30.19. Deut. 32.48. Exod. 8.24. cap. 26.5, 9. Isa. 47.1. Psal. 27.4. & 4.3. & 35.20. & 66.12. & 84.11. And multitudes of the like, it being a great part of the Masora.

Here we find are multitudes of Anoma∣lies in all Parts of the Punctation; and the Masorites note them all, but do no more than barely note them. Hence we conclude the Punctation, and all the Parts of it, were long before the Masorites, and before these Masoretick Notes; else they would have made no Anomalies, or given a Rea∣son why they did make any. If now the whole Punctation were not finished until A. D. 1030. as Capellus supposeth, then there is no time left for the Masorites to live in; for the Grammarians succeeded Ben Asher, A.D. 1030. and take no notice of them; which they would not have omit∣ted, had any such Criticks in their Learn∣ing been in their time. But if the Puncta∣tion were finished, A. D. 500. as Elias supposeth, then these Masorites who made

the Points, could not make these Notes on the Anomalies thereof also, as he ima∣gineth they did, but were long after them. Vtrum horum mavis accipe.

Capellus saith, If the Masorites did not Point the Text, it follows not the Points were before A.D. 500.

Resp. None else besides the Masorites are pretended to be the Authors of the Points since Ezra's time: If therefore the Masorites did not Point the Text, it must have been Pointed in Ezra's time.

Capellus supposeth the Anomalies may be either from Use against Grammar, or by Errour or Design.

In supposing it was by following Use and Custom, against Grammar-Rule; it must then be allowed, 1st. That all the Points, Vowels and Accents are usefully distinct from each other; which elsewhere he denyes; for they must distinguish all these Anomalies in their Sound by the Ear, till the Punctation was placed.

His other Conjectures, That it may be it was done by Errour, shews how little he regards the Providential Care of God over his Word, to be a perfect Rule to the Worlds end, so he can get but an it may be it was Errour; and then it may be it was De∣sign; and yet a Posse ad esse non valet conse∣quentia, as before was observed: We can∣not conclude that every thing is actually, whatever it may possibly be.

It may be (saith Capellus) the first Authors of the Points made these Anomalies by mistake; but the succeeding Masorites finding of them, suppo∣sed they were designedly made at first, and so left and noted them.

Resp. 1st. Then the Points, Vowels and Accents were made long before these Notes on the Anomalies of all the Parts of the Punctation.

2. Then the Punctation was not 500 years in composing; for all on't was finished before these Notes were made, which yet were many Ages in making.

3. Then the first Masorites were the greatest blundering Blockheads that ever were, to make such innumerable palpable Mistakes in what they had invented them∣selves: And yet their Successors must be supposed to esteem them so infallibly exact, as to follow them universally against their own Sence and Reason, not daring to recti∣fie one Mistake.

4. If Ben Asher, A. D. 1040. finished the Punctation, why did he not rectifie these Mistakes or Anomalies in all the Parts of it? And then let him produce some Evidence, that this Masora, or the Notes on these Anomalies, were made by Masorites that lived since Ben Asher's time; whereas the Grammarians succeeded Ben Asher, and take no notice of any such.

Secondly, Capelius says (if this won't do, that 'twas done by Mistake then,) It may be it was done at first designedly by the first Ma∣sorites, the Causes whereof we may not know; which the following Masorites, to prevent any Alterarion of them through inadvertency, have made those Notes on them: And this is not strange, seeing we must suppose Ezra did it de∣signedly; nor yet absurd, seeing we suppose Ezra did the same.

Resp. 1st. Still the Punctation was all fi∣nished by the first Masorites, contrary to his Opinion elsewhere.

2. Ezra was a publick Person, and di∣vinely inspired; but the Masorites were private Persons, and had neither ordinary nor extraordinary Call or Authority to place innumerable Points, contrary to all Grammar-Rule, without rendring an Ac∣count of the Reason why they did so. And therefore,

2ly. 'Tis absurd in them, though it was not so in Ezra; for (as Capellus saith) the cause of these Anomalies might be, that such was the Use and Custom of the Tongue, so to express some words different from Grammar-Rule: This might be known and done by Ezra, but could not be done by the Masorites, because the knowledge of such Niceties as the Anomalous Sounds, were lost long before their time. In short, this we say from hence, (1.) The Masorites are the Authors of the Masora; we know no other of their Works than this. (2.) These have made the Notes that are made on the Anomalous Punctation. And, (3.) They who made these Notes, we have proved were not the Authors of the Punctation; because all the Punctation must have been made long before these Notes could be made thereon, and therefore we conclude that the Masorites were not the Authors of the Punctation.

CHAP. XIV. The Absurdity of the Opinion, That the Ma∣sorites Pointed the Text, A. D. 500. di∣scovered from the Evidence there is that the Masora which the Masorites made, was long before A. D. 500.

THe Masorites, or Authors of the Ma∣sora, must by all means be accounted for the Authors of the Punctation; and yet it will not be allowed that the Points were invented before A. D. 500. after the Talmuds: We shall therefore prove that the Masora it self, or the principal Parts of it, were before the Talmuds, being owned as such in the Talmuds themselves.

Now as to the Parts of the Masora, the Antiquity whereof we are to examine, we agree with the Account that Elias him∣self giveth us thereof in Masoret Hamma∣soret, pag. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who tells us,

That by the Masorites the Scriptures are preserved so well, that no change can befall them in time to come in the least: And hence they are called a Hedge to the Law, which otherwise had been lost: These Masorites, he saith, numbred all the Verses, Words

and Letters of every Book of the Bible; and hence were called Sopherim, or Num∣berers; and hereby they found that Vau in the word Gihon was the middle of the Law; as to the Letters, Darash in Darash Moshe was the middlemost word: And he put on him the Breast-plate, Lev. 8.8. was the middlemost Verse in the Law: And the like was done of every Book of the Bible, (or twenty four Books:) As also they numbred the Verses, Words and Letters in every Parasha, or Section of the Law, as well as the whole Law,, which had 60045 Letters. Also they reckoned how oft every Letter in the Alphabet was found in the Scriptures: As for Instance, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Aleph was found (saith he) 42377 times in the Bible, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Beth 38218 times, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 29537 times, and so of the rest.

Thus far Elias.

Now we shall prove that the Parts of the Masora here mentioned, were long before the Talmuds; and yet the Authors of these Parts of the Masora, are here called the Masorites by Elias himself.

First, As to the Name of the Masora; that is, not only mentioned by both the Talmuds, but spoken of, as being as ancient as Ezra's time, in the Ierusalem Talmud, in Megilla, cap. 4. And in the Babylon Tal∣mud, in Masecat Nedarim, cap. 4. fol. 37. In explaining Neh. 8.8. And caused them to understand the reading; that is, the Masora, say both the Talmuds: That is (saith Elias) By Oral Tradition the Masora was then used. Not so (saith R. Azarias,) they speak of what was written, and not of Tradition. Again, The common Saying of the Tal∣muds shew the Name of the Masora was then known; viz. There is a Mother to the Scripture, and there is a Mother to the Ma∣sora. And as to the Work of the Masorites, Elias supposeth, cap. 2. that they made the Verses. And yet the Mishna it self, not long after the Destruction of Ierusalem, mentions the Verses; as in Masecat Megilla cap. 3. it saith. He that reads in the Law, must not read less than three Verses; and in the Paraphrase, not more than one. And as the Talmud on Megilla, cap. 3. fol. 32. saith, What Verse Moses did not make a Verse, we must not make a Verse.

Secondly, Again, As to the Parts of the Masora, their readings Ittur Sopherim, Keri u lo Ketib, thus saith the Talmud in Ma∣secat Nedarim, fol. 37. Rabbi Isaac saith, the reading of the Scribes, and Ittur Sopherim, and the Keri u lo Ketib, and the Ketib u lo Keri, is a Constitution of Moses from Sinai.

Thirdly, But the main Work that Elias ascribes to the Masorites, was the numbring the Verses, Words and Letters of Scripture; and telling which is the middle Verse, Word and Letter of the Law; and the like. Now of these the Talmud maketh mention most plainly, in Masecat Kedushin, cap. 1. fol. 30. it is thus written: Therefore Roshonim, the An∣cients, were called Sopherim, Numberers, because they numbred all the Letters which were in the Law; and these said that Vau in the word Gi∣hon, is the middlemost Letter of the Law, Lev. 11.42. That Darash, Lev. 10.16. is the middlemost word of the Law: And Hitgalach, Lev. 13.35. is the middlemost Verse in the Law, &c. The Ancients (they say) knew well the Letters full and defective; and that the Verses of the Law were 5888.

The Talmud indeed oft refuteth the Ma∣sora, as Elias confesseth in Table 1. Speech 5. but then the Masora must needs be in being. The Talmud takes notice of the Great and Small Letters, which is also a Part of the Masora; as on Sopherim, cap. 9. it saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is Great, Deut. 29.28. What Argument (saith Buxtorf) can be plainer than this, the Name, and Work, and Parts of the Masora, were long before A. D. 500. Therefore they were not first made, A. D. 500. as Elias thinketh: Indeed he allows them to be by Tradition before, a thing most absurd and im∣possible, but not written until after the Tal∣muds, A. D. 500.

Now we say, if the Masorites Point∣ed the Text, they were these Masorites who wrote the Notes about the number of the Letters, Words and Verses of the Bible, of the Ittur Sopherim, the Keri u lo Ketib, the Reading of the Scribes, the Let∣ters Greater, or Lesser than ordinary, the Letters and Words Full and Defective, and the like; all which the Talmuds plainly say were made by the Ancients, their Ance∣stors, long before their time, or else the Punctation was made by other Masorites than these the Talmud speaks of: if the Punctation was made by these Men, then it was made long before A. D. 500. even as ancient as Ezra; for so ancient is this Masora esteemed by the Jews to be. Elias his Fancy, That this Masora was Orally preserved from Ezra's time, till A. D. 500. is refuted by R. Azarias, and R. S. Arcuvolti.

But if the Masorites who Pointed the Text were not these ancient Masorites the Talmuds speak of, then they were either those that made the Notes on the Anoma∣lous Punctation, and upon the rest of the things that are the Subject of the Masore∣tick Observations which compose the pre∣sent Masora, or else they were some others. But they were not these Masorites neither; for we have at large proved that those who made the Notes on the Punctation, were long after the Punctation was made: And that those who made the other Notes on the other Parts of the Masora, did only observe what they found the Text to be; but placed nothing to the Text, their only design being to prevent any from so do∣ing in time to come. If therefore the Masorites Pointed the Text, they were other Masorites than either of these before mentioned: But other than the one or the other sort of Masorits already men∣tioned, we neither read nor hear of; and till some other can be found out, we con∣clude the Masorites, A. D. 500. or since

that time, did not Point the Text. And so much for the discovery of the Impro∣bability of those Persons Pointing the Text, to whom the Invention of the Punctation is ascribed.

CPAP. XV. The Absurdity of the Opinion, That the Text was first Pointed A D. 500 further discovered from the Evidences of the Points, Vowels, Accents and Verses being long before that time; and the Instance of a Pointed Copy of R. Hillel, A. D. 340. and from the Ac∣count we have of these things in the Zoar, Bahir, Mishna and Talmuds.

WE shall conclude this FIRST PART with the Evidences of the mention that is made of all the Parts of the Punctation, in the ancient Writings of the Jews that were before A. D. 500. and the Instance of a Pointed Copy of R. Hillel, of great Antiquity.

We shall begin with the Book entitled Habahir, made by R. Nechoniah, fifty years before Christ. (Vid. Buxtorf Thesaurus, A. D. 1609. pag. 66, 67. Iuchasin, pag. 20. Tsemach David, part 1. pag. 35. R. Aza∣rias Meor Enaim, cap. 59.) The words of Bahir are these:

The Points in the Let∣ters of the Law of Moses, are like unto the Breath of Life in the Body of a Man.

And in the Book called Zohar, made by R. Simeon ben Iochai, a hundred years after Christ. (Vid. Buxtorf, ibid. and Bi∣bliothaeca Rabbinica on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Iuchasin, pag. 42. R. Azarias, Meor Enaim in imre bina, cap. 59.) The words of Zohar are these:

Not one Letter is able to signifie one thing or ano∣ther without the Points: All the Letters without the Points, are like the Body with∣out the Soul; when the Points come, then the Body stands in its Station.

And so in the Tikkunim, or Explications of the Zohar, saith R. Azarias, ibid. And in the Preface of Tikkunïm, 'tis said,

The Accents are as the Breath, and the Points as the Spirit, and the Letters as the Soul, the one come after the other.

And this, as R. Azarias, ibid. observes, is not meant of the Sounds only, but of the Shapes of the Points, Vowels and Ac∣cents, as he there gives Instances. See more of the ancient Caballistical Wri∣ters expressly mentioning the very Names also of the Points, Vowels and Accents in Buxtorf's Tiberias; and De Punctorum Origine, pag. 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59. together with the Answer to the impertinent Cavils of Capellus, as to the Antiquity and Inte∣grity of the Books Zohar, Bahir, and the Pointed Copy of Hillel; who objecteth, It may be that they have forged Titles of Antiqui∣ty, to advance the Price in the Sale of them.

Resp. And it may not be so: But if it may be so, that doth not prove it was so. Nor doth Capellus produce any thing that renders the Antiquity of these Books so much as suspected; for the Antiquity of these Books is universally owned by the Jews: Those of them who write about these things, plainly declare their Antiquity to be what we say it is.

3. The Mishna, about A. D. 150. takes notice of the Verses in Masecat Megilla, cap. 3. and saith,

He that reads in the Law, must not read less than three Ver∣ses; nor more than one Verse in the Chaldee Paraphrase.

4. The Ierusalem Talmud, about A. D. 230. in Megilla, cap. 4. on Neh. 8.8. And they read in the Book, in the Law of God:

That is (say they,) the Scripture distinctly; that is, with the Targum, or Chaldee Pa∣raphrase, and gave the sence: These (say they) are the Accents which they placed, Samu taam, they put the Accents to it; and Some say these are the Pauses: Others say these are the Beginnings of the Verses.

5. The Babylon Talmud, in Masecat Ne∣darim, cap. 4. fol. 37. and in Masecat Me∣gilla, cap. 1. fol. 3. on Neh. 8.8. they say likewise:

And they read in the Book of the Law of God, that is, the Scripture, di∣stinctly that is, with the Targum, and gave the sence, These are the Verses; and cause them to understand the reading, This is the Stops of the Accents; And others say these were the Masora, for they were forgotten, and they then restored them.

And in Masecat Nedarim, fol. 37. ibid. Rabbi Isaac saith,

The reading of the Scribes, and Ittur Sopherim, and Keri u lo Ketib, and Ketib u lo Keri, is a Constitution of Moses on Sinai.

First, saith R. Isaac, The reading of the Scribes, as Erets Shamajim Mitsraim; that is, The Scribes taught the People how they had received from Moses to read these words, and the like; one way in one place, and another way in another, as some∣times Arets, sometimes Erets, &c. For, as R. Nissin saith, Erets is changed, by reason of Athnak, into Arets; and so of Shamma∣jim Mitsraim, &c.

And as R. Sal. Iarchi saith,

The Scribes taught them how they ought to read the Words without the Vowel-Letters being added in all places; as Erets, without writing Aleph between Resh and ••sade: And so Shamajim, without writing Aleph between Shin and Mem: And all this (say the Talmud) is a Constitution of Moses from Sinai.

And as it is impossible that the Sounds of all the Punctation could be preserved with∣out the Shapes of them were written to the Text: So R. Azarias, in Meor. Enaim, cap. 59.

sheweth, that what the Talmuds speak on Neh. 8.8. is all of it about what was writ∣ten, and no part of it was spoken about what was kept by Oral Tradition. As,

First, The Book of the Law which they read, that was Mikra, the Scripture, di∣stinctly, with Targum, or the Chaldee Para∣phrase, which (saith he) was then writ∣ten; and so (saith he) were the Points, and Accents, and Masora, which they there speak of, was then written, as well as the Scripture: And the Chaldee Paraphrase was Written, and not kept by Oral Tra∣dition only, as Elias fancieth; a thing most absurd and impossible.

Capellus objects, That R. Sal. Iarchi, R. Aza∣rias, &c. are Modern Rabbins: But what saith Rabboth, and the Ancient Writers?

Resp. They cannot expound the Talmud, which was made long after they were dead; but the Ancient Writers speak plain enough of the Points, as Bahir, Zohar, &c. And why may not the Talmuds speak of the Shapes of the Points? There is not one place of Scripture (saith Buxtorf) in all the Talmud, any otherwise read than our pre∣sent Punctation reads it: Which could not have been, had not the Bible been then Pointed; for the Sounds could not be kept without the Shapes, as we have already shewed in the PROEMIVM; and as themselves say, the LXX. and Chaldee dif∣fer from our Copy, because they had no Points; and we may as well say the Talmud universally agreeth with our Punctation, because they had Points, which they could not have done without. And as to the LXX. &c. they differ from the Letters and Words, as well as about the Points; and therefore Capellus reckons their Copy dif∣fered from ours in Letters, as well as Points: But these things we may examine hereafter, the Punctation is all we are now concerned about. And hereby all those Objections of the silence of the ancient Caballistical Wri∣tings, and of the Talmuds about the Points, are obviated. (Vid. Pugio Fidei, pag. 92. the former Edition: And pag. 111. of the last Edition. See also Buxtorf. de Punct. Orig. part 1. cap. 5, & cap. 6.) We shall only add the Instance of a Pointed Copy of R. Hillel, which was before A. D. 500. as ancient as A. D. 340.

'Tis said in Iuchasin, fol. 132. col. 1. 'In the year 956, or 984, there was a great Per∣secution in Lions, and then they brought out from thence the twenty four Books called the Bible, which R. Hillel wrote, and by them they corrected all their Books; and I have seen a Part of them that were sold in Africa, and in my time they had been written nine hundred years. And Kimchi saith in his Grammar, That the Pentateuch of it was at Toletola, in Spain, in his time.

Object. 'Tis not said here 'twas Pointed.

Resp. But 'tis said Kimchi speaks of it in his Grammar. And Kimchi, speaking of it, says it is Pointed; as in Michlol, fol. 93. col. 1. he saith

That R. Iacob, the Son of Eleazer, writeth, That in the Book of Hillel, which is in Toledolid, the word Ti∣deru 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Deut. 12.11. is found with∣out a Dagesh lene in Daleth, that is, Daleth raphated. So on 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Vedareshu in Psal. 109.10. he saith, That the word Veda∣reshu is read with broad Kamets, like 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Veshameru, and so we have received the reading of it: And in the Book of Hillel, which is kept at Toledolid, the Masorites make this Note upon it, viz. This is no where else found with Ka••uph Kamets: and so Nagid writeth, That he found it like∣wise in the Masora so written with Katuph Kamets.

So in his Book of Roots, Sepher Sherashim, on the Radix 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 about the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Tesomet,

There Mem is with Segol, contrary to Rule, and is as if it were with Pathack: And in the Book of Hillel, which is in To∣ledolid, it is with Pathack.

So Mercer, on Prov. 24.14. on the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Dech, he saith,

In a Manuscript it is writ with Tsere; but in the Margin it is noted, that in Hillel's Copy 'tis written with Segol.

The same faith R. Moses Bar Nachman, in his Commentary on the Book of Ietsir, or Iezirah.

Capellus objects, It may be Hillel's Copy was not so ancient as is pretended. But gives no Reason why we should suspect its Anti∣quity, which is generally owned by the Jews, as Iuchasin, Kimchi. (Vid. Buxt. de Punct. Orig. part 2. cap. 7.)

So that the Points were before A. D. 500. being found in Hillel's Copy, A. D. 340. and mentioned in the Bahir, Zohar, Mishna and Talmuds.

And hence we conclude the FIRST PART of this Discourse, That the Text was not Pointed by the Masorites, A. D. 500. or since that time at Tiberias, or elsewhere.

And thus have we collected what others have written, and our selves observed about the Novelty of the Points; the like we in∣tend about their Antiquity in the SECOND PART, but more briefly, if possible.

The End of the FIRST PART.