"He Shall Not Judge by What His Eyes See": Messianic Authority in the Dead Sea Scrolls

Author(s): John J. Collins

Source: Dead Sea Discoveries, Vol. 2, No. 2, Messianism (Jun., 1995), pp. 145-164
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4201511
Accessed: 12-03-2016 02:37 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dead Sea Discoveries.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
"HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE":

MESSIANIC AUTHORITY IN THE

DEAD SEA SCROLLS

JOHN J. COLLINS

The University of Chicago

"Let no one think that in the days of the Messiah anything of the

natural course of the world will cease or that any innovation will be

introduced into creation. Rather, the world will continue in its

accustomed course. The words of Isaiah 'The wolf shall dwell with

the lamb and the panther shall lie down with the kid' (Isa. 11:6) are

a parable and an allegory... Likewise, all similar scriptural

passages dealing with the Messiah must be regarded as figurative.

...The sages said: 'The only difference between this world and the

Days of the Messiah is the subjection of Israel to the nations.""

These were the words of Maimonides, who was remote in time

and in spirit from the authors of the DSS. They certainly would not

suffice as a characterization of the full range of eschatological

expectations that we find in the Scrolls. But while the Scrolls enter-

tain hopes of "everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without

end" (IQS 4) and envisage a conflagration where the torrents of

Belial devour as far as the great Abyss (1QH 3), they also envisage,

in the words of S. Talmon, a "New Order to be established by the

Anointed," which is "not otherworldly but rather the realization of

a divine plan on earth, the consummation of history in history. "2

The expectation of a messiah or messiahs is not only a dream of a

utopian future. It also has a restorative aspect, and entails practical

ideas about the ordering of society. To quote Talmon again, "it is

the politeia of the New Commonwealth of Israel and the New

Universe. '3

I Maimonides, "Laws Concerning the Installation of Kings," cited by G.

Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism (New York: Schocken, 1971) 28-29.

2 S. Talmon, "Waiting for the Messiah at Qumran," in Judaisms and their

Messiahs (ed. J. Neusner, W.S. Green, and E. Frerichs; Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1987) 131.

3 Ibid.

?B) E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1995 Dead Sea Discoveries 2, 2

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 146 JOHN J. COLLINS

It is necessary at the outset to define our terms. By "messiah"

I mean an agent of God in the end-time, who is said somewhere in

the literature to be anointed, but who is not necessarily called

"messiah" in every passage. In the DSS, we are principally con-

cerned with two messianic figures. The royal, Davidic messiah may

also be referred to as the messiah of Israel, the Branch of David,

the Prince of the Congregation, or even, although the matter is

disputed, the Son of God.' The priestly messiah is the messiah of

Aaron, but he is also known as the Interpreter of the Law and may

be described on occasion without the use of a specific title. One may

also speak of a prophetic messiah, since prophets are sometimes

called "'anointed ones" in the Scrolls, but the role of the

eschatological prophet is somewhat elusive. Finally, one may speak

of a heavenly messiah, such as the heavenly judge who is called

both messiah and Son of Man in the Similitudes of Enoch.

Heavenly agents (Michael, Melchizedek, the Prince of Light) play

a prominent part in some of the Scrolls, but they are not called

11nvo3 or said to be anointed. For our present purposes we shall con-

fine our attention to the more familiar, earthly messiahs.

It is also necessary to set forth our presuppositions about the

nature of the Qumran corpus. I share the consensus view that the

Scrolls represent the library of a Jewish sect, most probably to be

identified as the Essenes. They were not necessarily all produced at

Qumran. Some may have been brought there from other "camps"

at the time of the Jewish war. The library evidently includes mate-

rial that was not sectarian in origin, but is conspicuously lacking in

material that can be characterized as pro-Hasmonean or as

Pharisaic.6 We cannot assume that all the Scrolls fit into a coherent

4 For a survey of definitions of messiah see G.S. Oegema, Der Gesalbte und scen

Volk (Gbttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994) 26-27. Oegema's own defini-

tion is "a priestly, royal or other figure that plays a liberating role in the end-

time. "

I On the correlation of messianic titles see my essay, "Messiahs in Context.

Method in the Study of Messianism," in Methods of Investigation of the Dead Sea

Scrolls and the Khirbet Qumran Site: Present Realities and Future Prospects (ed. M.O.

Wise, N. Golb, J.J. Collins and D. Pardee; New York: New York Academy of

Sciences, 1994) 213-27. For full discussion of the various messianic figures in the

Scrolls see my book The Scepter and the Star. Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls

(New York: Doubleday, 1995).

6 Compare F. Garcia Martinez and A. van der Woude, "A Groningen

Hypothesis of Qumran Origins," RevQ 14 (1990) 524: "among all the texts pre-

served there is no trace of any book that can be attributed to an opposing religious

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NO(l JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 147

system, and we must allow for the possibility of development over

time. I believe, however, that it is possible to identify a core group

of sectarian compositions, consisting of the two major Rule books,

the Community Rule and the Damascus Document, and closely

related texts (including IQSa, IQSb, the pesharim, such midrashic

texts as the Florilegium and 1 QMelchizedek, the Testimonia, the

War Rule, 4QMMT and the Hodayot).7 Differences may emerge

even within this corpus, but I take them to be representative of the

sect in a way that cannot be assumed for all the fragmentary com-

positions from cave 4. Moreover, much if not all of this corpus

seems to have been composed within a relatively brief period, in the

late second and early first centuries BCE.8

The Emergence of Messiani'sm in the Hasmonean Period

Messianic figures are mentioned, with varying degrees of promi-

nence, in each of the Rule books and in several pesharim. Perhaps

the best known reference is found in the Community Rule, which

prescribes that the members of the community should abide by

their original precepts "until there shall come the prophet and the

messiahs of Aaron and Israel" (IQS 9:1 1). The Damascus Docu-

ment contains several references to the "messiah of Aaron and

Israel," which I take to imply two figures rather than one, although

the matter is disputed. These passages say little about the messiahs

except that they are expected to come. They do however imply that

these figures were readily intelligible to the community, and that

messianic expectation was well established. This is not to say that

it was fundamental to the existence of the sect. Neither 4QMMT

nor the Damascus Document lists messianic expectation as a factor

that led the group to split off from the rest of Israel. It is possible

that the reference to the messiahs was a secondary addition to the

group." I do not, however, agree with their assertion that "all the works found

in Qumrax that cannot be classified as strictly sectarian must have been composed

before the split that gave rise to the Qumran group" (p. 526).

' Compare C.A. Newsom, "'Sectually Explicit' Literature from Qumran," in

The Hebrew Bible and its Interpreters (ed. W.H. Propp, B. Halpern and D. N. Freed-

man; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 169.

8 H. Stegemann (Die Essener, Qumran, Johannes der Tdufer undJesus [Freiburg:

Herder, 19931 192) claims that no "Essene" writing was composed later than the

middle of the first century BCE.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 148 JOHN J. COLLINS

Community Rule.9 It would seem, however, that messianic expec-

tation arose early and came to be taken for granted in the com-

munity, so that passing allusions to it would suffice.

Messianic expectation should not, however, be taken for granted

by the modern student of Second Temple Judaism. Even though

the seeds of such expectation were present in the Law, Prophets and

Psalms, which were well established as authoritative Scriptures by

the second century BCE, there was not an unbroken history of mes-

sianism in the post-exilic period. The expectation of a king from the

Davidic line, who would fulfill the prophecies, flourished for a short

time after the Babylonian exile, focussed on the person of Zerub-

babel. Thereafter we find little evidence of messianic expectation in

the Second Temple period. There are a few oracles of uncertain

provenance in the later chapters of Zechariah, but nothing that we

can associate with a specific time and place. Our information about

Judaism in the Persian and early Hellenistic periods is admittedly

spotty, but what is most striking is the absence of messianic expec-

tation around the time of the Maccabean revolt, when we might

well have expected to find it. Not only is such expectation lacking

in Ben Sira and the books of the Maccabees, but it also fails to

appear in the apocalypses of Daniel and Enoch, despite the preoc-

cupation of Daniel with the idea of an eschatological kingdom.'0

There is, in fact, only one clear witness to the expectation of a

Davidic messiah in Jewish literature from the last two centuries

BCE, apart from the DSS. This is found in the Psalms of Solomon,

a document composed in the middle of the first century BCE, after

the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey."I

Yet the Rule books from Qumran, the Community Rule and the

Damascus Document, can allude to the coming of messiahs of

Aaron and Israel without elaboration, presumably on the assump-

tion that the allusions are clearly intelligible. On any reasonable

J.T. Milik, review of P. Wernberg-Moller, The Manual of Discipline, in RB 67

(1960) 41 1, claimed that the earliest copy of the Rule does not contain the passage

about the messiahs. L.H. Schiffman, however, claims that two fragments were

incorrectly joined at this point. See J.H. Charlesworth, "From Messianology to

Christology. Problems and Prospects," in idem (ed.) The Messiah (Minneapolis:

Fortress, 1992) 26-27.

10 See my essay, "Messianism in the Maccabean Period," injusdaisms and their

Messiahs, 97-109.

"' See the review of the evidence by J. H. Charlesworth, "The Mcssiah in the

Pseudepigrapha," in ANR W I. 19.1. 188-218.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 'HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 149

reckoning, these Rule books were composed somewhere in the cen-

tury between the Maccabees and Pompey. Presumably, then, there

had been a revival of messianic expectation in this period. This was

also the time of the Hasmoneans, the descendants of the Mac-

cabees, who had established a Jewish monarchy, even though they

could not claim Davidic descent. There is good reason to believe

that the revival of hope for a messiah, or messiahs, was a reaction

to the kingship of the Hasmoneans, which some Jews of the time

viewed as illegitimate.

The anti-Hasmonean implications of the hope for a messiah from

the Davidic line are expressed clearly in the Psalms of Solomon,

which are not found at Qumran and have often been associated

with the Pharisees. 12 The seventeenth Psalm complains bitterly

about "sinners," who "took possession with violence," and "set

up in splendour a kingdom in their pride. They laid waste the

throne of David in the arrogance of their fortune." These sinners

are overthrown, however, by "a man that is foreign to our race."

It is clear, then, that they are not foreigners, but Jewish kings who

were not of the Davidic line, that is, the Hasmoneans, who were

overthrown by the foreigner Pompey.13 The first Hasmonean ruler

to use the title "King" on his coins was AlexanderJannaeus (103-

76 BCE). Josephus claims that the predecessor of Jannaeus,

Aristobulus (104-103), "saw fit to transform the government into

a kingdom... and he was the first to put a diadem on his head"

Ant. 13:301). His father, John Hyrcanus (135/4-104 BCE), accord-

ing to Josephus, "was accounted by God worthy of three of the

greatest privileges, the rule of the nation, the office of high priest,

and the gift of prophecy" (Ant. 13:300). Hyrcanus' father, Simon

Maccabee had been recognized as leader and High Priest by

popular decree, and the Maccabean appropriation of monarchic

power could be traced back to Jonathan Maccabee in 152 BCE.

12 J. Schuipphaus, Die Psalmen Salomos. Ein ZeugnisJerusalemer Theologie und From-

migkeit in der Mite des vorchristlichenjahrlhunderts (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1977) 127-37.

13 J. Tromp, "The Sinners and the Lawless in Psalm of Solomon 17," NovT

35 (1993) 344-61, dismisses this interpretation on the grounds that the verbs are

in the future tense and that "it seems somewhat odd that the author would pray

for the total destruction of the Hasmonean high priests and kings by foreign

intruders, even if he were opposed to them" (p. 350). He offers no refutation of

the usual view that the future tense reflects Hebrew imperfects, and he does not

do justice to the obvious contrast between the foreign king and the sinful rulers,

which implies that the rulers are native.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 150 JOHN J. COLLINS

The fact of Hasmonean rule, even before the adoption of the title

King, could have caused traditionalists to look for a restoration of

the Davidic line. Moreover, the fact that all the Hasmoneans,

beginning with Jonathan, combined political rule with the exercise

of the High Priesthood, provides the backdrop for the distinctive

notion of two messiahs, one of Aaron and one of Israel, that we find

in the Scrolls.

The Scrolls do not provide us with a systematic explanation of

their messianic hopes. We have several passages that ground these

hopes by reference to specific biblical verses, but none that relates

them to the historical developments that may have triggered them.

A rare window on historical circumstances may be provided by the

Testimonia. This text strings together quotations from Exod. 20:21

(Samaritan recension = Deut. 5:28b-29 + Deut. 18:18-19, the

prophet like Moses), Num. 24:15-17 (Balaam's Oracle) and Deut.

33:8-1 1 (the blessing of Levi). These passages are generally taken

as the basis for the expectation of a prophet and the messiahs of

Aaron and Israel.'4 The series concludes, however, with a passage

of no messianic significance, from the Psalms of Joshua. It begins

with a citation of the curse on Jericho fromJosh. 6:26: "Cursed be

the man who rebuilds this city! At the cost of his firstborn he will

found it, and at the cost of his youngest son he will set up its gates.

Behold, an accursed one, a man of Belial... " It now appears, from

the excavations conducted by E. Netzer in 1987-88, that the man

who rebuilt Jericho was none other than John Hyrcanus.'5 Hyr-

canus was said to combine the rule of the nation, the office of High

Priest and the gift of prophecy. The Testimonia, in contrast, lays

out the biblical basis for three distinct figures: king, priest and

prophet. The citation from the Psalms of Joshua becomes intelligi-

ble if the author saw the fulfillment of Joshua's curse in the death

of Hyrcanus' sons, Antigonus and Aristobulus I, in 103 BCE,

within a year of their father's death.

It is likely then that the revival of messianic expectation in the

Hasmonean era represented a critique of the Jewish rulers of the

day. Some traditionalists deemed them illegitimate kings because

'4 See G.J. Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran. 4QFlorilegium in itsJewish Context (JSOT-

Sup 29; Sheffield: JSOT, 1985) 309-10.

15 H. Eshel, "The Historical Background of the Pesher Interpreting Joshua's

Curse on the Rebuilder of Jericho," RevQ 15 (1992) 409-20.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NOT-JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 151

they were not from the line of David. Others also objected to their

combination of the offices of High Priest and King. The messianic

expectations represented the dissidents' view of the proper order of

society. In the Psalms of Solomon, the emphasis is on Davidic

lineage. In the sectarian scrolls, the emphasis is on the separation

of the offices of priest and king.

An objection might now be raised against the view that Qumran

messianism was anti-Hasmonean on the basis of 4Q448, which

speaks of Jonathan the king and has been interpreted as a prayer

for King Alexander Jannaeus.'6 This is the only document found

at Qumran that can be described as pro-Hasmonean, whereas

several are decidedly critical of the dynasty. The anomalous charac-

ter of the text has led some scholars to search for a different inter-

pretation. So John Strugnell reads "Rise up, 0 Holy One, against

King Jonathan," but this is scarcely possible, since the text con-

tinues "and all the assembly of your people Israel. "17 Vermes sug-

gests that the Jonathan in question was not Jannaeus, but Jonathan

Maccabee, 8 but the latter was never called king in antiquity, and

the only "Jonathan the king" for whom we have evidence was

Alexander Jannaeus. The anomaly, then, cannot be explained

away. To say that the text was not a sectarian composition scarcely

relieves the problem, since no other pro-Hasmonean literature has

been found in the caves, regardless of original provenance.

But neither does the text prove that the Qumran community, or

whoever hid the scrolls in the caves, was not generally anti-

Hasmonean. It only proves that they were not consistent. We do

not know the occasion of this text, but it is not difficult to conceive

of situations where the Dead Sea sect might have sided even with

a Hasmonean king. One such situation might be a war against the

foreign enemies of Israel. Another might be conflict between Jan-

naeus and the Pharisees, bitter enemies of the Dead Sea sect.19 In

fact the Pharisees launched an open rebellion against Jannaeus

16 E. and H. Eshel and A. Yardeni, "A Scroll from Qumran Which Includes

Part of Psalm 154 and a Prayer for King Jonathan and His Kingdom," IEJ 42

(1992) 199-229.

17 D.J. Harrington and J. Strugnell, "Qumran Cave 4 Texts: A New Publica-

tion, " JBL 112 (1993) 491-99.

"I G. Vermes, "The So-Called King Jonathan Fragment (4Q448)," JJS 44

(1993) 294-300.

19 Stegemann, Die Essener, 187-88.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 152 JOHN3J. COLLINS

about 88 BCE and called in the Syrian king Demetrius Eukairos to

help them. At first Jannaeus was defeated, but then the people

rallied round him. Demetrius withdrew and Jannaeus had some

eight hundred of the rebels crucified.20 This incident is noted in the

Pesher on Nahum, where Jannaeus is called "the lion of wrath"

who "hangs men alive." Jannaeus appears to be censured in the

Pesher because of the crucifixions, but it is quite conceivable that

the Dead Sea sect would have supported him in his struggle against

Demetrius and the Pharisees. In any case, the "Jonathan the King"

text remains anomalous. Temporary support for a Hasmonean

king is not necessarily incompatible with the hope that the Hasmo-

nean dynasty would be replaced by a Davidic messiah and an

Aaronide High Priest.

The Role of the Davidic Messiah

The most complete description of the role of an ideal king in the

texts from Qumran is found in the "Law of the King" in 1 lQTa

56:12-59:21. It is not certain that the Temple Scroll was written by

a member of the communities envisaged in the Community Rule

or Damascus Document, but at least it must come from related

circles.2' It throws some interesting light on the understanding of

kingship which lies behind the conception of the royal messiah.

In general the scroll follows Deuteronomy in emphasizing that

the king must be a native Israelite and in setting limits to his power

in various ways. It elaborates the commandment that he not

multiply wives: he must be monogamous. It adds a provision that

he not pervert judgment. Most of the passage, however, is con-

cerned with the conduct of war against the enemies of Israel. Even

in this matter, the king is not granted independent authority: "He

shall not go until he has presented himself before the High Priest,

who shall inquire on his behalf for a decision by the Urim and

Tummim. It is at his word that he shall go and at his word that he

20 Ant. 13:372-83; E. Schiurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus

Christ (rev. and ed. G. Vermes and F. Millar; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973) 1.220-26.

21 The sectarian origin of the Temple Scroll in disputed by H. Stegemann, "Das

Land in der Tempelrolle und in anderen Texten aus den Qumranfunden," in G.

Strecker (ed.) Das Land Israel in biblischer Zeit (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck &

Ruprecht, 1983) 154-71; L.H. Schiffman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls

(Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1983) 17.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 'HE SHALL NOTrJUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 153

shall come, he and all the children of Israel who are with him. He

shall not go following his heart's counsel until he has inquired for

a decision by the Urim and Tummim." In the matter of judgment,

too, he must be guided by a council, consisting of twelve princes,

twelve priests and twelve Levites. The authority of the king, then,

is clearly limited in the Temple Scroll. In this respect, the scroll is

heir to the criticism of the monarchy in biblical texts of the exilic

period. Deuteronomy 17 prescribes that the king should have a

copy of the law that is in the charge of the Levitical priests, and read

in it all the days of his life. In the great vision of restored Israel in

Ezekiel 40-48, the role of the "prince" (O',M) is reduced to suppor-

ting the cult, and is generally overshadowed by the interest in the

temple and the sacrifices. The Temple Scroll is less restrictive than

Ezekiel, and casts the king primarily in the roles of military leader

and judge.

The king envisaged here is not a messianic king in the

eschatological sense. His rule is conditional and he is not said to be

the fulfillment of messianic prophecy.22 Consequently the scroll

should not be regarded as a law for the end of days. The nature of

the king's authority, however, is quite similar to that vested in the

Davidic messiah in the DSS. While the full picture is not found in

every individual text, the role of the royal messiah may fairly be

summarized as that of military leader and judge, but subject to

priestly authority.

The text chosen to represent the royal messiah in the Testimonia

is Balaam's oracle of the star and the scepter, a passage well known

as a messianic prophecy in laterJewish tradition, especially for its

application to Bar Kokhba, the leader of the last Jewish revolt

against Rome in 132 CE. There is some variation in the interpreta-

tion of this oracle in the Scrolls. It is cited in col. 7 of the Damascus

Document from the Cairo Geniza (CD), manuscript A, in a

passage also found at Qumran. (It is absent from the parallel

passage in CD MS B from the Geniza, which has not been found

22 See my essay, "Teacher and Messiah," in E. Ulrich and J.C. VanderKam

(ed.): The Community of the Renewed Covenant. The Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead

Sea Scrolls (Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity 10; Notre Dame, IN: University

of Notre Dame, 1994) 193-210. The view that the Temple Scroll envisages a

messianic king is proposed by M.O. Wise, A Critical Study of the Temppk Scrollfrom

Qumran Cave 11 (Chicago: Oriental Institute, 1990) 177; "The Eschatological

Vision of the Temple Scroll," JNES 49 (1990) 155-72.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 154 JOHNJ. COLLINS

at Qumran.)2" At least in this passage in CD it is understood to

refer to two figures rather than one: "The star is the Interpreter of

the Law who shall come to Damascus: as it is written, A star shall

comeforth out ofJacob and a sceptre shall rise out of Israel" (Num. 24:17).

"Prince" (W'M) is the title of the lay leader of Israel in the Priestly

source of the Pentateuch, and for the Davidic king in the book of

Ezekiel. It is a messianic title in the Scrolls. The orade emphasizes

his military role: "he shall crush the temples of Moab and destroy

all the children of Sheth. " This oracle is also cited in the War Rule,

without interpretation. Several scholars seem to have missed the

allusion, and then expressed surprise at the absence of the messiah

in the War Rule.24 The role of the messianic "Prince" in the final

war is now more vividly described in the fragmentary 4Q285, the

so-called "dying messiah" text, which cites Isaiah 11, and narrates

that the "prince of the congregation, the branch of David," will kill

someone, possibly the king of the Kittim.25 The Branch of David

is also associated with the final battle in the pesher on Isaiah.26

The military and judicial aspects of the messiah's role are clearly

evident in the blessing of the Prince of the Congregation in lQSb:

"that he may establish the kingdom of His people for ever, [that

he may judge the poor with righteousness and] dispense justice with

[equity to the oppressed] of the land, and that he may walk perfectly

before him in all the ways [of truth]..." The Blessing is heavily

indebted to Isaiah 11. "(May you smite the peoples) with the might

of your hand and ravage the earth with your scepter; may you bring

death to the ungodly with the breath of your lips (Isa. 11 :4b); may

righteousness be the girdle (of your loins) and may your reins be

girded (with faithfullness)" (Isa. 11:5). It goes on to pray, "May he

make your horns of iron and your hooves of bronze; may you toss

like a young bull [and trample the peoples] like the mire of the

23 The textual history of this passage has been the subject of much debate. See

S.A. White, "A Comparison of the 'A' and 'B' Manuscripts of the Damascus

Document," RevQ 48 (1987) 537-53.

24 E.P. Sanders,Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE-66 CE (Philadelphia: Trinity

Press International, 1992) 296; P.R. Davies, "War Rule (IQM)," ABD 6.875.

25 G. Vermes, "The Oxford Forum for Qumran Research Seminar on the Rule

of War from Cave 4 (4Q285)," JJS 43 (1992) 85-90; M. Bockrnuehl, "A 'Slain

Messiah' in 4Q Serekh Milhamah (4Q285)?" TynBul 43 (1992) 155-69; M.G.

Abegg, "Messianic Hope and 4Q285: A Reassessment," JBL 113 (1994) 81-91.

26 M.P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran Interpretations of Biblical Books (CBQMS

Washington D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1979) 70-86.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 155

streets." The messianic "Prince" is clearly a warrior, and like the

kings of old he is charged with the administration of justice.

In my view the Aramaic "Son of God" text should also be read

as a prediction of the messianic king:27

"Son of God he will be called and Son of the Most High they will

name him... People will trample people and province, province,

until the people of God arises and all rest from the sword. His

kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom and all his ways truth. He

will judge the earth in truth and all will make peace. The sword will

cease from the earth and all provinces will worship him. The great

God will be his help. He will make war for him. He will give

peoples into his hand and all of them he will cast down before him.

His sovereignty is everlasting sovereignty..."

In this case the interpretation is disputed. Some scholars hold

that the one who will be called Son of God and named Son of the

Most High is a Syrian king,28 or a "usurper of the title,29 or even

an anti-Christ.30 There is a blank space in the manuscript before

the rise of the people of God, which seems to mark a point of transi-

tion. The people, rather than the Son of God, may be taken as the

antecedent in the latter part of the text, so "its kingdom is an

everlasting kingdom..." etc. It is diftficult to believe, however, that

a Jewish text would say that an impostor would be called Son of

God without making clear that the title was inappropriate. For the

present, it will suffice to note that the text makes excellent sense if

it is applied to the Davidic messiah. There is clear basis in the

Hebrew Bible in 2 Samuel 7 and Psalm 2 for referring to the

messiah as Son of God, and 2 Samuel 7 is so interpreted in the

Florilegium: "'I will be his father and he shall be my son.' He is

the Branch of David who shall arise with the Interpreter of the Law

(to rule) in Zion (at the end) of days." A virtually identical phrase

is used with clear messianic reference in the Gospel of Luke: "He

27 See my essay, "The Son of God Text from Qumran," in From Jesus to John.

Essays in Honour of Manrnus dejonge (ed. M. de Boer; Sheffield: JSOT, 1993) 64-8 1.

28 SoJ.T. Milik, in his unpublished lecture on this text at Harvard University

in 1972. See E. Puech, "Fragment d'une Apocalypse en Arameen (4Q246 -

pseudo-Dand) et le 'Royaume de Dieu'," RB 99 (1992) 127.

29 G. Vermes, "Qumran Forum Miscellanea I," JJS 43 (1992) 303; E.M.

Cook, Solving the Mysteries of the Dead S&a Scrolls (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994)

169-70.

30 D. Flusser, "The Hubris of the Antichrist in a Fragment from Qumran,"

in idem, Judaism and the Orngins of Christianity (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1988) 207-13.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 156 JOHNJ. COLLINS

will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the

Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David. He will

reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will

be no end... he will be called the Son of God." The messiah, rather

than the people of God, can be expected to judge the earth in truth,

while his major function seems to be to subdue the nations, and

make war by the power of God.

The Priestly Messiah

Perhaps the most distinctive aspect of the messianic expectation

of the Dead Sea Scrolls lies in the fact that the royal "messiah of

Israel" is often linked with the priestly "messiah of Aaron." Ever

since the publication of the Community Rule, the expectation of

two messiahs has been thought to be standard at Qumran.3' The

quasi-normative character of this expectation has been called into

question in recent years, on the ground that lQS 9 is the only

passage that speaks unambiguously of two messiahs." The objec-

tion, however, cannot be sustained. In part it rests on the inter-

pretation of the phrase "messiah of Aaron and Israel" in CD. The

phrase can be interpreted, by analogy with "the king of Sodom and

Gomorrah," as referring to only one messiah. But then we must

wonder why this formulation is used. Should not a priestly messiah

be simply the messiah of Aaron?33 It is hardly conceivable that this

phrase was coined to describe one messiah, and later was found

conveniently suitable for two. One could suppose that the phrase

originally referred to two messiahs, and was then adapted to refer

to only one messiah in CD (presumably the priestly messiah since

he will atone for the guilt of the people in CD 14:19). But then we

find that the fragments of CD col. 7 preserved at Qumran interpret

Balaam's oracle in terms of two figures, one of whom is the Prince

3 See e.g. G. Vermes, "The Qumran Messiahs and Messianism," in Schurer,

The Hisiory of the Jewish People, 2.550-54; S. Talmon, "Waiting for the Messiah at

Qumran," in idem, The World of Qumran from Within (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1989)

273-300.

32 M.O. Wise and J.D. Tabor, "The Messiah at Qumran," BARev 18 (1992)

60-65.

33 See the comments of F.M. Cross, "Some Notes on a Generation of Qumran

Studies," in The Madrid Qumran Congress (ed. J. Trebolle Barrera and L. Vegas

Montaner; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992) 1.14.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 157

of the Congregation.34 So we should have to suppose either that the

references to a single messiah of Aaron and Israel are secondary in

CD, or that CD merged the messiahs of Aaron and Israel into one,

but then, perhaps at a later stage, reintroduced the royal, warrior

messiah." It is surely simpler to suppose that the phrase "messiah

of Aaron and Israel" envisaged two messiahs throughout.

In any case, the question of dual messianism cannot be reduced

to the occurrence of the expression "messiah(s) of Aaron and

Israel." The issue is really whether there is another figure who

enjoys authority equal to or greater than the Davidic messiah. We

have seen already in the Temple Scroll that the king was expected

to defer to the authority of the High Priest. Similarly in the pesher

on Isaiah, the biblical phrase "He shall not judge by what his eyes

see" is taken to mean that the messiah will defer to the teachings

of "the priests of renown." A priest is said to command in 4Q285,

and the High Priest has a prominent role throughout the War Rule.

In the "messianic rule" (lQSa) the priest takes precedence over the

messiah of Israel at the common table. In the Scroll of Blessings,

the blessing of the High Priest precedes that of the Prince of the

Congregation. In the Florilegium, the Branch of David is accom-

panied by the Interpreter of the Law. Also in CD 7:18 the Prince

of the congregation is linked with the Interpreter. In short, all the

major Rule books support the bifurcation of authority in the mes-

sianic era. We need not insist that every document found in the

caves conforms to this structure. It would be unreasonable to expect

each document to present its messianic expectations in full in any

case. But at least we find strong attestation for the notion of two

messiahs, especially in the core sectarian documents. The bifurca-

tion of authority cannot be dismissed as an aberration.

Talmon has argued at length that the dual messianism of the

Scrolls reflects the political ideas of the early post-exilic community

of the late sixth century BCE.36 The obvious precedent is found in

the prophet Zechariah's symbolizing of Zerubbabel and the High

Priest Joshua as "two sons of oil," or anointed ones (Zech. 4:14).

34 For 4QDb 3 iv, see the reconstruction of B.Z. Wacholder and M.G. Abegg,

A Preliminary Edition of the Unpublished Dead Sea Scrolls: The Hebrew and Aramaic Texts

from Cave Four (Washington, D.C.: Biblical Archeology Society, 1991). 8.

35 See, e.g. G.J. Brooke, "The Messiah of Aaron in the Damascus Docu-

ment," RevQ 15 (1991) 215-30.

36 Talmon, "Waiting for the Messiah," 290-93.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 158 JOHN J. COLLINS

Against this, it must be said that Zechariah 4 (unlike Numbers 24

or Isaiah 1 1) is not a prominent messianic proof-text at Qumran.37

To my knowledge it is cited only once, in a fragment of the pesher

on Genesis, 4Q254.38 The fragment is too small to provide a con-

text, but another manuscript of the same work (4Q252) contains a

well-known reference to "the messiah of righteousness, the branch

of David," with reference to Gen. 49:10,39 and it is reasonable to

expect a messianic interpretation here too.40 Some further indirect

support for Talmon's thesis can be found in 4Q390 ("Pseudo-

Moses"), which exempts the first ones who came up from the land

of their exile to build the temple from the general charge of wrong-

doing against the Israelites.4' Yet it must be said that there are

remarkably few references to the prophecy of Zechariah or the early

post-exilic situation. The bifurcation of authority in the Scrolls is

more likely to be a reaction to the combination of royal and priestly

offices by the Hasmoneans than to preserve any memory of the

post-exilic community.

What role was envisaged for the priestly messiah? He was to

atone for the sin of the people (CD 14:19), presumably by offering

the prescribed sacrifices. But more than that he was a teacher. The

biblical passage chosen to represent the priestly messiah in the

Testimonia is the blessing of Levi from Deuteronomy 33: "They

shall cause thy precepts to shine before Jacob and thy Law before

Israel. They shall send up incense towards thy nostrils and place a

burnt-offering upon thine altar." The same text is cited in the

" See the comments of J.C. VanderKam, "Jubilees and the Priestly Messiah

of Qumran," RevQ 13 (1988) 365.

-8 PAM 43.233. F. Garc:ia Martinez, "Messianische Erwartungen in den

Qumranschriften, " Jahrbuchfuir Biblische Theologie 8 (1993) 177. This text is listed

as 4Q253 in E. Tov with S.J. Pfann, The Dead Sea Scrolls on Microfiche, Companion

Volume (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1993) 38.

39 This text is called "The Blessings of Jacob (4QPBless)" in G. Vermes, The

Dead Sea Scrolls in English (3rd ed.; London: Penguin, 1987) 260.

40 G.J. Brooke, "4Q254 Fragments 1 and 4, and 4Q254a: Some Preliminary

Comments," Proceedings of the World Congress of Jewish Studies, Division A (1994)

185-92 argues that the quotation from Zechariah could be read in various ways,

but that in view of the juxtaposition with Gen. 49:8-12 it most probably reflects

the view that the Davidic messiah is the messiah but that a priestly figure stands

alongside him.

4 D. Dimant, "New Light on the Jewish Pseudepigrapha-4Q390," in

Trebolle Barrera and Vegas Montaner, The Madrid Qumran Congress, 2.414, 418.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 159

Florilegium,42 and in Jubilees 31. The Blessing of the Priests

describes them as those whom God has chosen "to confirm his

covenant forever and to inquire into all his precepts in the midst of

all his people, and to instruct them as he commanded" (1QSb 3:23-

24). The blessing prays that God may make them "an [eternal]

light [to illumine] the world with knowledge and to enlighten the

face of the Congregation [with wisdom]" (lQSb 4:27-28). Perhaps

the most striking elaboration of the teaching office of the

eschatological priest is found in 4Q541 (4QAaronA): "He will

atone for the children of his generation, and he will be sent to all

the children of his people. His word is like a word of heaven, and

his teaching conforms to the will of God. His eternal sun will shine,

and his fire will blaze in all the corners of the earth. Then darkness

will disappear from the earth and obscurity from the dry land.""+

This figure, whom I take to be the messiah of Aaron, might

reasonably be described as a "teacher of righteousness" for the end

of days. The historical Teacher of Righteousness, who was active

at the beginning of the community's history, is also called on occa-

sion "the priest.''45 When CD 6:11 refers to "one who will teach

righteousness at the end of days" the reference is most probably to

the priestly messiah.46 (In the early days of research on the Scrolls,

the passage in CD gave rise to some wild speculation that the

historical Teacher was expected to rise and come again at the end

of days, a view associated especially with Dupont-Sommer and

John Allegro.)47 A similar ambiguity is attached to the title "Inter-

preter of the Law." In CD 6, he is clearly a figure of the past. In

42 Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran, 204.

3 See VanderKam, "Jubilees and the Priestly Messiah," 363-64.

44 E. Puech, "Fragments d'un apocryphe de Levi et le personnage eschatologi-

que. 4QTestLevic-d(?) et 4QAJa," in Trebolle Barrera and Vegas Montaner, The

Madrid Qumran Congress, 2.449-501.

4- 4QpPs 37 3:15. This title does not warrant the inference that the Teacher

must have been High Priest. See my article, "The Origin of the Qumran Com-

munity: A Review of the Evidence," in To Touch the Text: Biblical and Related Studies

in Honor ofJoseph A. Fitzmyer,S.J. (ed. M.P. Horgan and P.J. Kobelski; New York:

Crossroad, 1989) 166, and the fuller treatment of the issue by M.O. Wise, "The

Teacher of Righteousness and the High Priest of the Intersacerdotium: Two

Approaches," RevQ 14 (1990) 587-613.

46 See my essay "Teacher and Messiah," in Ulrich and VanderKam, The Com-

munity of the Renewed Covenant.

47 For a summary of the debate see J. Carmignac, "Le Retour du Docteur de

Justice a la fin des jours?" RevQ 1 (1958-59) 235-48.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 160 JOHN J. COLLINS

the Florilegium, however, he is expected to arise with the Branch

of David at the end of days. In view of the teaching function of the

priesthood, and the fact that the Teacher/Founder is described as

a priest, it seems likely that the eschatological "Interpreter of the

Law" is none other than the messiah of Aaron.8 The community

conceived of the definitive, eschatological High Priest in the image

and likeness of the historical Teacher.

Since the DSS are thought to span a period of more than a cen-

tury and a half, it is natural to expect some development, in mes-

sianism as in other matters, over that period. The various theories

of messianic development that have been proposed, however, have

not proven persuasive.49 They typically depend on the view that the

phrase "messiah of Aaron and Israel" refers to one messiah rather

than two, and we have seen that that view is problematic. They also

depend on assigning dates to individual documents, to a greater

degree than the available evidence permits. I do not wish to deny

the possibility of development during the life of the Qumran com-

munity, but I submit that in the matter of messianism the evidence

does not permit us to trace it with any confidence. While we have

texts that speak of an eschatological priest without reference to a

king (4Q541), and others that speak of a Davidic messiah without

reference to a priest (4Q246, 252),5? the pattern of dual messiahship

is typical, especially in the sectarian Rule books. Moreover, if the

book ofJubilees represents the kind of circles from which the move-

ment described in the Damascus Document emerged, we should

expect that dual messianism, rather than priestly messianism alone,

was the norm from the start since both Levi and Judah are singled

out for blessing in Jubilees 31.51 Where the relative standing of

royal and priestly messiahs is in evidence, the priestly figure takes

precedence.

The priority of priestly authority is amply documented in the sec-

tarian Rule books. In the words of the Damascus Document:

'where there are ten, there shall never be lacking a Priest learned

48 Brooke, Exegesis at Qumran, 204-05.

49 The best known theory is that of J. Starcky, "Les quatres 'tapes du mes-

sianisme a Qumran," RB 70 (1963) 481-505. See also Brooke, "The Messiah of

Aaron," 215-30.

50 But note the reference to "two sons of oil" in 4Q254. See Garcia Martinez,

"Messianische Erwartungen," 177.

'' VanderKam, "Jubilees and the Priestly Messiah," 353-65.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALL NOT JUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 161

in the Book of Meditation; they shall be ruled by him" (CD 13:2-

3). The Community Rule (IQS 6:3-4) has a similar provision,

adding that the priest is the first to bless the food at the common

meals. The so-called "Messianic Rule," 1QSa, makes clear that

even when the messiah of Israel comes, the priest still takes

precedence at the common table. Both the Damascus Document

and the Community Rule provide for another official or overseer,

the j who serves, among other things, as the bursar of the con-

gregation (1QS 6:19-20). The Damascus Document has a rule for

the j or Guardian, which charges him with instructing the

congregation in the works of God, and with caring for the members

as a shepherd cares for his sheep. The analogy of the shepherd is

often used for royal figures in antiquity, and so the question arises

whether the "guardian of the camp" anticipates the eschatological

"prince of the congregation," as the presiding priest may be said

to anticipate the role of the messiah of Aaron. The -rpmn is called

on to exercise judgment: it is he who examines the candidates for

admission to the congregation, and all suits and judgments are

brought to him for adjudication. He has no military function such

as the "prince of the congregation" has. This difference may be

only a matter of circumstance. The congregation has no need for

a military leader until the eschatological conflict. The most signifi-

cant difference, however, lies in the fact that the -j7pn is charged

with instructing the congregation. No such charge is ever laid on

the royal messiah. The fact that the Vp:= is also in part a teacher

underlines the preponderant importance of teaching authority in

the sectarian Scrolls.

The Messiah Whom Heaven and Earth Obey

Our discussion of messianic authority would be incomplete with-

out some discussion of the recently published text from cave 4 that

speaks of a messiah whom heaven and earth obey.52 The text

(4Q52 1) goes on to say that "the glorious things that have not taken

place the Lord will do as he s[aid], for he will heal the wounded, give

life to the dead and preach good news to the poor...", a passage

that has a notable parallel in the New Testament, in Jesus' reply

52 E. Puech, "Une Apocalypse Messianique (4Q521)," RcvQ 15 (1992)

475-519.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 162 JOHN J. COLLINS

to an inquiry by John the Baptist. The opening lines of the frag-

ment are heavily dependent on Psalm 146, which refers to the Lord

"who made heaven and earth, the sea and all that is in them." The

psalm, however, has no mention of a messiah. The purpose of this

innovation is not immediately apparent, as the Qumran text goes

on to say that God will release captives, give sight to the blind, etc.,

just as he does in the psalm. Again, at line 12, it is God who will

heal the wounded, give life to the dead and preach good news to the

poor. The Lord, of course, is normally the one who raises the dead

(cf. the second of the Eighteen Benedictions: "Lord, you are

almighty forever who makes the dead to live..."). It is surprising,

however, to find God as the subject of preaching good news. This

is the work of a herald or messenger.

The phrase in question is taken from Isa. 61:1: "The spirit of the

Lord God is upon me, because the Lord has anointed me; he has

sent me to preach good news to the poor, to bind up the

brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives and release to the

prisoners; to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor, and the day of

vengeance of our God." In Isaiah 61, the speaker is a prophet, but

he also claims to be anointed, so he is a MI= or anointed one. The

anomalous reference to a messiah in the adaptation of Psalm 146

might be explained on the assumption that the acts of God are per-

formed through the agency of an anointed agent, just as they are

in Isaiah 61, although the anointed figure in Isaiah 61 is not said

to give life to the dead.

The editor of this text, Emile Puech, assumes that the messiah

whom heaven and earth obey is the royal messiah.53 If we are cor-

rect, however, that the messiah is God's agent in the remainder of

the text, Puech's interpretation is unlikely to be correct. It is quite

possible that God should use an agent in the resurrection, but this

agent is unlikely to be the royal messiah. The resurrection is some-

times associated with the messianic age in writings of the first cen-

tury CE, but the messiah is never said to raise the dead. In the New

Testament, Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection, not the

agent, in 1 Corinthians 15. In Revelation 20, the martyrs come to

life and reign with Christ for a thousand years, but Christ is not

said to raise them. In laterJewish tradition we find the notion that

the dead will first come to life in the time of the Messiah (y. Ket.

S3 Ibid., 497.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 "HE SHALI NOTJUDGE BY WHAT HIS EYES SEE" 163

12:3), but the resurrection does not come through the royal

messiah. Rather, "the resurrection of the dead comes through

Elijah" (m. Sot. 9, end; y. Sheq. 3:3). Elijah was credited with

raising the dead during his historical career (1 Kings 17; cf. the

story of Elisha in 2 Kings 4). So we read in Pes. Rab Kah. 76a:

"Everything that the Holy One will do, he has already anticipated

by the hands of the righteous in this world, the resurrection of the

dead by Elijah and Ezekiel, the drying of the Red Sea by Moses..."

I suggest, then, that the messiah whom heaven and earth obey

is an anointed eschatological prophet, either Elijah or a prophet like

Elijah.54 Elijah's command of the heavens was legendary. In the

words of Sirach, "By the word of the Lord he shut up the heavens

and also three times brought down fire" (Sir. 48:3). The "two olive

trees" in Revelation 11, who have authority to shut up the sky so

that no rain may fall and to turn the waters into blood, are usually

identified as Elijah and Moses. The expression "two olive trees"

is an allusion to the "two sons of oil" or anointed ones announced

by the prophet Zechariah.

It is not certain whether 4Q521 should be regarded as a product

of the Dead Sea sect. The sectarian literature is notoriously lacking

in references to resurrection, and has relatively few references to

the eschatological prophet. In favor of sectarian origin, however,

are several parallels in vocabulary, especially with the Hodayot and

the interest in the poor, 0'U3t, which suggest a common cultural

context." The question must be left open. If I am correct, however,

authority here is vested in the word of a prophet rather than in the

decree of a king.

Conclusion

The messianic expectations of the Dead Sea sect reflect its

priorities for the ordering of Jewish society. The royal messiah has

an important place in this scheme of things. He is to establish the

kingdom of his people, and in the process destroy the sons of

darkness. He is not, however, envisaged as the highest authority in

the New Age. Rather, the eschatological Priest, the messiah of

54 For more complete argumentation see my article, "The Works of the

Messiah," Dead S&a Discoveries 1 (1994) 98-112.

55 Puech, "Une Apocalypse Messianique," 517.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 164 JOHN J. COLLINS

Aaron, takes precedence, especially in his capacity as teacher. Just

as the historical Teacher of Righteousness had a pivotal role in the

life of the community prior to the eschaton, so there would be

another to teach righteousness in the end of days.

Maimonides, in his radical reinterpretation of apocalyptic tradi-

tion, held that "the sages and prophets longed for the days of the

Messiah not in order to rule over the world and not to bring the

heathens under their control... All they wanted was to have time

for the Torah and its wisdom with no one to oppress or disturb

them.' '56 The sages of Qumran were not quite so unworldly. The

defeat of the Gentiles, and of their enemies within Judaism, was

certainly important to them. But no doubt one of the things they

wanted most was to have time for the Torah and its wisdom, as

interpreted by their own Teacher, with no one to oppress or disturb

them. They could probably concur with the conclusion of

Maimonides' vision of the messianic age: "In that age there will be

neither famine nor war, nor envy nor strife, for there will be an

abundance of worldly goods. The whole world will be occupied

solely with the knowledge of God. Therefore the children of Israel

will be great sages; they will know hidden things and attain an

understanding of their creator to the extent of human capability, as

it is said: 'For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of God as the

waters cover the sea."'57

56 Maimonides, "Laws Concerning the Installation of Kings," cited by

Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, 29.

S7 Ibid.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:37:16 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions