Literature. — Besides the works luentioned in the art. see Literature under Saint ; J. Denney, EtiT, ' Koinans," London, I'.lOO (esp. chs. tt-s); Sanday-Headlam, ICC, 'Honians'», Edinburqrh, 1902 ; J. A. Beet, llulincxs, London, 1880 ; see also J. Vernon Bartlet, art. 'Sanctification,' in HDD, and the Literature there appended. K. H, STRACHAN,
SANCTUARY This term is used by AVandRV
(l)in He 9' for ridviov, which denotes tlie sacred tent in both its parts, as is implied by the synonymous (jK-qvi), 'tabernacle,' in the following verse; and (2) in He 8= for rd iiyia, the heavenly sanctuary or holy of holies (RVm 'holy things'). The word represents 471a in He 9- (UV 'the Holy place'), where the omission of the article, in contrast to the invariable LXX usage (Lv lO'', Nu 3", etc.), serves to emphasize the holiness (M. Dods in EGT, ' Hebrews,' 1910, in loco). In this passage ^710 stands in express contrast to &yia. ayluiv (9^), ' the
454
SANDAL
SANHEDRIX
Holiest of nil' (AV), 'the Holj' of holies' (RV). Hut the siini)le rd dyia frequently denotes ' the Holiest,' and is so translate<l by tlie AV in lie 9* 10'", thou<j;h elsewhere (9-» 13") ' tlie holy place,' which is the RV renderin<,' in all these passages. Tliis usage is justihed by Lv 16-, etc., wliere aip, I. XX ri dyiov, denotes the holy place within the veil ; Vulg. snnctunriHm quod est intra velum. It is now recognized by all scholars that the central sanctuary and elaborate ritual of the desert wander- ings are not historical realities but products of religious ideali.sm, based in all essential features upon the architectural plan and sacerdotal rubric of the Second Temple. But the argument of the writer of Hebrews is scarcely affected by the change from the traditional to the critical view. Whether the earthly sanctuary, which he at once magnifies and depreciates, was the creation of Moses or of Ezekiel and Ezra, it has now had its day and must cease to be, since the true high priest has passed into the heavenly sanctuary, and become the minister of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man (He 9'- ^). L1TER.4TDRK. — Artt. ' Tabernacle * and * Temple ' in irZ>5 and
^Bi. James Steahan.
SANDAL See Shoe.
SANHEDRIN.— 1. The name Sanhedrin (j'-i-in^D,
pi. nin-iri^D ; Targumic also I'njp, pi. unn-ijp, Heb.- Aram. form of crw^Sptov, 'council,' specifically ; court of justice ' [so LXX Pr 22'» 26'-i= 3P^ Ps.-Soi. iv. 1 ; Josephus, A7it. XIV. V. 4]) is the name of the high court of justice and supreme council, specifi- cally at Jerusalem [Sank. iv. 3 ; S6ta, ix. 18), called also ' Sanhedrin of Seventy-one ' {Sheb. ii. 2), ' the Great Sanhedrin ' {Sank. i. 6 ; Midd. v. 4) in contradistinction to ' the Little Sanhedrin of Twenty-three,' the Beth Din shel shiVim tif ehdd, ' the court of justice of seventy-one ' (Sank. i. 5 ; T6s. Sank. iii. 4) and most frequently Beth Din hag-qadOl shebyerushdlaim, ' the high court of justice of Jerusalem ' {S6ia, i. 4 ; Gitt. vi. 7 ; Sanh. xi. 4), also Beth Din hag-gadol shebhlishkath hag- gaztth, ' the great court of justice which has its sessions in the hall of hewn stones ' (Si/re Dt. 154 ; Sanh. xi. 2). The older name is yepovffla, 'senate' (.Jos. Ant. XII. iii. 3 ; 2 Mac l'" 4" 11", 1 Mac 128, Jth 4', and elsewhere ; also simply ' the elders ' or ' the elders of the people ' (I Mac 7=' U-' 12^^ 1420) . cf. Zikne'amkd beth Yisrael in the ancient eighteen benedictions for the Sanhedrin, zCiken, 'elder,' being the name of the single member of the Sanliedrin = <ri;FeSpos (Jos. Ant. XIV. ix. 4). Another name for the Sanhedrin (possibly the Jerusalemic and not national Council of Justice) is /3ouX); (Jos. BJ II. XV. 6, xvi. 2, xvii. 1, v. xiii. 1), whence Jos. ib. II. xvii. 1 ; Mk 15" /3oi;Xei;T7)s = D"aii!-i3 (J. Levy, Neuhebr. u. chald. Wbrtcrbuch iiber die Talmudim u. Midraschim, 1876-89, i. 199 f.). On Maccabajan coins the Sanhedrin is called heber ha-y'hfidim, 'representative assembly of the Jews' (F. W. Madden, History of Jewish Coinage, 1864, p. 58 ; A. Geiger, Urschriften und Ubersctzungen der Bibel, 1857, p. 121 ; J. Wellhausen, Die Pharisder und die Sadducrier, 1874, pp. 29, 34).
2. Origin and history. — The institution is based on Dt n"'" (Si/re and Sanh. 2a) and the seventy elders on Nu 11'* (Sifre). The Talmudic sources ascribe it to Moses ; also that of ' the Little Sanhedrin of Twenty-three ' for each tribe after Dt 16'8 {Sanh. 166, Jer. Sanh. i. 19c ; cf. S6/d, 446 ; Targ. Jer. Nu 25<- ' 7^ 9*, Ex 2P» 322>''-, Lv 241=) ; and speak of its existence under Joshua, Jabez, Jerubbaal, Boaz, Jephthah, Samuel, David, and Solomon, and until the time of the captivity by Nebuchadnezzar (Babd bathrd, 121i; Y6md, 80a; Mak. 236 ; Koh. B. 18 ; Targ. Ru 3" 4", 1 Ch 4'2 5"
IS", Ps 69' 80' ; M.K. 26a; Baba Kammd, 61a; Ycb. 77a : Ber. 3b-4a ; Sanh. 166, 107'f ; Targ. Est. 1"; Jer. Sanh. i. 186). Ag.ain, during the Second Temple, after the men of the Groat Synagogue from Ezra to Simon the Just II. had oecu|jied the place of the Sanhedrin, Talmudic tradition holds that it was re-organized under the zfigijijth {duum- viri [Jb6th, i. 4-11 ; Hag. ii. 2 ; Peak', ii. 6 ; Yad, ii. 16 ; Jer. S6(d, ix. 24a]) and continued in power under such form until the destruction of theTemiile, when it was transferred to Jabneh, to Usha, to Sepphoris, and, finally, to Tiberias {liOshhash. 316). This whole view, however, bears the imprint of the schoolhouse, and forms part of the Pharisaic system which in sujiport of the Oral Law postu- lated an unbroken chain of tradition without any interference by any priestly — that is, Sadducean — authority. In this sense Jose ben IJalaphtha, the great 2nd cent, authority for Talmudic historio- graphy, says {T6s. Sanh. vii. 1 ; Hag. ii. 9): 'In former times there were no dissensions in Israel. Every legal question that could not be decided in any city was submitted to the Sanhedrin of 23 on the Temple hill, and if not decided there, to the Little Sanhedrin of 23 in the Temple rampart, and if not decided there either, brought for final decision before the Great Sanhedrin in the hall of hewn stones which was in session from morning to evening, never allowing fewer than 23 of its members to be jjresent for the discussion of the subject in the Temple schoolhouse. Thus the Hdlakah was fixed and developed in Israel. Dissensions arose when the disciples of Hillel and Shamniai increased in number and failed to acquire through personal contact with their master the necessary knowledge and thus the doctrine was divided into many doctrines.' As a matter of fact, pre-Exilic history presents nowhere a trace of an institution like the Sanhedrin. The seventy elders invested with spiritual powers (Nu ll'^- ^'s Ex 24'- » ; cf. ■''■xx hi<-^,r:i^ [Ex 24"] with 'rsx.-i [Nu 11==]) point to the existence of some sort of representative body of the nation (cf. Ezr 8" with Ex 3'« 18'% Dt 2P, 1 K 8' 12' 20', 2 K 23'), but they form no judiciary like the Sanhedrin. The story in 2 Ch 19'- of a high court of justice established by king Jehoshaphat, after Dt 17*'', consisting of Levites, priests, and heads of the families, with two chief members— the high priest to decide the religious, the governor of Judah to decide the monarchical, matters — cannot be adduced as proof of the Mosaic origin of the Sanhedrin, as does D. Hoffmann {Der oberste Ge- riehtshof, pp. 6, 20), but is, like all the Chronicler's stories, a reflexion of the views of the post-Exilic writer. In fact, it indicates, as pointed out by Wellhausen (Prolegomena zur Gcschichte Israels^, 1886, p. 199), the existence of the Sanhedrin in his time, i.e. in the 4th century. As to the duumviri see below.