[2130] The question is discussed: first, who blessed the priests? and, secondly, what part God had in that benediction? The answer will readily be guessed (Chull. 49 a). In Siphré on Numbers, par. 43, the words are quoted (Numb. vi. 27) to show that the blessing came from God, and not from, although, through, the priests. In Bemidb. R. 11 ed. Warsh. iv. p. 40 a there is a beautiful prayer, in which Israel declares that it only needs the blessing of God, according to Deut. xxvi. 15, on which the answer comes, that although the priests bring the benediction, it is God Who stands and blesses His people. Accordingly, the benediction of the priests is only the symbol of God's blessing.
[2131] For these different numbers very curious symbolical reasons are assigned (Megill. 23 a.)
[2132] This division seems to have originated in Babylon. Comp. Zunz, Gottesd. Vortr. pp. 3, 4.
[2133] Meg. 29 b.
[2134] Jer. Shabb. xvi. 1; Sopher. xvi. 10.
[2135] Comp. Megill. 31 b.
[2136] Comp. Duschak, Gesch. des jüd. Cultus, pp. 251-258.
[2137] Gitt. 59 b.
[2138] Some of the leading Rabbis resisted this practice, and declared that a Rabbi who yielded to it deserved death (Megill. 28 a; comp. Megill. 22 a. See generally Duschak, u. s. p. 255.).
[2139] Every descendant of Aaron in the Synagogue is bound to join in the act of benediction, on pain of forfeiture of the blessing on himself, according to Gen. xii. 3. Otherwise he transgresses three commands, contained in Numb. vi. 27 (Sot. 38 b). The present mode of dividing the fingers when pronouncing the blessing is justified by an appeal to Cant. ii. 9 (Bemidb. R. 11), although no doubt the origin of the practice is mystical.
[2140] The reasons commonly assigned for it are unhistorical. Comp. Sketches of Jewish Life,' p. 278. The term Haphtarah, or rather Aphtarah and Aphtarta is derived from patar, to dismiss - either, like the Latin Missa, because it ended the general service, or else because the valedictory discourse, called Aphtarah, was connected with it.
[2141] In a few places in Babylon (Shabb. 116 b), lessons from the Hagiographa were read at afternoon services. Besides, on Purim the whole Book of Esther was read.
[2142] Megill iv. 4.
[2143] Comp. 1 Cor. xiv. 27, 28.
[2144] Megill. 24 a.
[2145] At a later period, however, ordination seems to have been required for preaching. By a curious Rabbinic exegesis, the first clause of Prov. vii. 26 was applied to those who preached without ordination, and the second clause to those who were ordained and did not preach (Sot. 22 a).
[2146] Thus, we have a saying of the first century You preach beautifully, but you do not practice beautifully' (Chag. 14 b; Yebam. 63 b.)
[2147] Moed K 21 a.
[2148] Eccl. ix. 15.
[2149] Ab. de R. Nath. 4.
[2150] Meg. 4 a.
[2151] Targum on Judg. v. 2, 9.
[2152] Darshanin, Pes. 70 b.
[2153] Ag. Ap. ii. 18.
[2154] In Flacc., ed. Frcf., p. 972; de Vita Mos. p. 688; Leg. ad Caj. pp. 1014, 1035.
[2155] For ex. Pes. 53 b.
[2156] In Sot. 40 a we have an account of how a popular preacher comforted his deserted brother theologian by the following parable: Two men met in a city, the one to sell jewels and precious things, the other toys, tinsel, and trifles. Then all the people ran to the latter shop, because they did not understand the wares of the former.' A curious instance of popular wit is the following: It was expected that a person lately ordained should deliver a discourse before the people. The time came, but the Methurgeman in vain bent his ear closer and closer. It was evident that the new preacher had nothing to say. On which the Methurgeman quoted Habak. ii. 19: Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach !' (Sanh. 7 b). It was probably on account of such scenes, that the Nasi was not allowed afterwards to ordain without the consent of the Sanhedrin.