the Truth of the Cabbala, that is in the Book Zohar, my Opinion fhould go for nothing. Let us to him add Bobar, Cotemporary with Jonathan the Paraphraft 40 Years before Christ, on Gen. 18, 3. The Points are to the Letters what the Soul is to the Body.

But what Answers the Antagon to fuch Authority, Alas, fays Bishop Walton, If the Authority of thofe Books, were as great as is pretended, our Caufe were utterly loft. Therefore, fays Capellus on the Antiquity of the Points, The Jews are not to be credited in this Affair; or if they were, who can tell but these Teftimonies about the Points are foifted in? But when Buxtorf has taken him to Task about the Matter contained in the Book, which contributes much to the probability of fuch things; he makes a most Noble Defence, Its no wonder that I cannot expound fuch a Book rightly, who never had a Hebrew Mafter; fays he, I wonder that he found not more faults, in my Tranflating him, than he has.

Refp. Are not 10 or 11 in a Page, or Two enough, Is a Man obliged to Print all the Faults he finds? But they have another Refuge, which makes to my purpose, viz. That the Rabbies meant the Accentual Points, not the Vowels; and that's all I contend for.

Let us next come to the Authors of the Ma fora, and they tell us, That on Exod. 32.6. is never again found with Segol and Silluk: On Fofh. 6. 14. TN is never found more with Sakeph katon, and Kametz. Here it cannot, nor is not denied, That the Points were before the Maforites. And therefore a Difpute arifes about feveral Kinds. The Tiberians, Anno 500, and Ben Alber

D

Afher, and Naphtali Anno 1000, they were made by the firft, and obferved by the next. Cap. Vind. Refp. We may as well obferve all various Lections as Maforetic Obfervations, For, the former was the business of B. Afher and Naphtali. Therefore according to the Jews, The Men of the Great Synagogue were the First, and the Tiberians the laft of the Maforites. The Work of B. Afher,and

the diffe מחלפות תמקריאה B. Naphtali is called

rent Readings, Viz. between the Eastern and WeStern Books.

The Maforetic Notes are Signs of Fact and Cuftom, not Faults and Defects; but that is the late Fault or Fraud, fays Amama, that all the Waves of the Sea cannot wash off, viz. That the Bib. Regia, and Corn. a Lap. fhould put Gen. 3. 15. N and among the Mafora's Marks; as if the Margin were be, and Text he, to Found the Worfhip of the Virgin upon.

הוא

Laftly, In Menaffes Ben Ifrael's Bible, there is obferved by Pfeiffer, 27 places, viz. Ruth 3.5.17. Lam. 1.18. & 2,2. & 5.3. Jude 20. 13. &c. Where the Vowels are put without the Confonants in the Text, and are the Object of the Maforetic Obfervation.

The Third Rank of Authorities, fhould be Talmudical; Authors that lived before the Sixth Century, and therefore before the Tiberian Maforite the Ferufalem is thought commonly to be compos'd Ann Chrifti 230. by R. Fochanan; the whole of both compleated before Anno Chrifti 500. And yet both often quote the Maforites. Hierof. Megill. C. 4. Bab. Gr. Nodarim c. 4. 37. f. Megilla, c. 1. f. 3. and Kiddufchim, c. 1. fol.30. Therefore the former Maforites were before the Talmudists.

The

The next thing is, What they fay for this purpose?

Refp. They fay, on Deut. 11. 12, You must not read with (*) for what? but with (*) One Hundred, Non O Ifrael, What doth the Lord thy God require of thee? They anfwer Cabbalistically, One Hundred Prayers. Now it is a common Phrafe with them, You must not read thus, but thus: Not that they thought the Original Text was corrupted, or changed. For I both read, and hear from Learned Men, that not one Quotation in all the Talmud, differs from our Hebrew Bible; but they mean thus, That you may make fome Spiritual Allegory. However it fhews this, That the Points were in their Day. And Wafmuth. p. 170. adds to the Talmuds Comment on Neb. 8.8. the Glof fers or Interpreters of the Talmud, R. Sol. R. Re chai, and R. Affarius in Meor Enajim, afferting, That the Intention of their Text was, about the Figures of the Accents themselves, and not the Sound only: And for this quotes the Talmud Berach, fol. 62. wherefore they ufe not to wipe any Duft from off the Book of the Law, with the Right Hand, but the Left. Why? R. R. Nachm. because with the Right Hand the Accent of the Law is shewn, D ; hence its plain, it was an accent that both Finger and Eye was employed about; But there is no need of founding an accent, he will have a great Gift of founding who varys with the accents.

7

To make this Argument the more binding, I will follow, Cap. Vind. S42. who pretends to loofe all its Joints with great Eafe.

1. Says he, I value not the Authority of Ephodeus, Azarius, Jofeph, Medico or Cofri, they are D 2

too

too late to have Weight, and too partial, being zealous Defenders of the Points of Antiquity.

Refp. The Firft was 1390, the Second 1570, the Author of Cozri is about the Eleventh Century that is turn'd into Hebrew, then Contemporary with Aben Ezra. If this Authority be of no value far lefs then is fingle Elias Levita's, who lived fince 1579, the Acquaintance of our late Reformers, Fagius and Munfter.

2. He faith, Doth not He know? That the Additions to the Talmud are later than it, Let him look his Fathers Eibl. Rabb. on the Word

תוספתא

Refp. with the Reader may (for I hope it will make him) conclude, the action more become a Capellum, than Ovem; to stink more of the Goat, than favour of the Sheep; He dares not fay these Quotations are out of the fuper-added and later. Tofiphots.

3. His Refuge is, That the Talmud mentioning Dy fo frequently means the found, that is the accent in Voice, not Figure or Writing.

And thus he grants the accents to be meant in Neb. 8 8. which is to me great fatisfaction; for I never dreamt what he denies, viz. That the Levites did not take a Pen in their Hands, and write them down; and this Diftin&tien is his last Retreat, and Caftle of Security; where he says, being the Defender, Denying only is his part, he is not obliged to fhew probability of Reafon for it. But becaufe the laft Inftance was fo urgent, he further adds, That the Motion with the Hand was to teach them Mufick by the Accents; an Art he denies they ferve for elsewhere.

Refp.

Refp. My bufinefs is to look for Credibility not Subtilty, for upon his two foundations, 1. Diftinction between Sound and Figure. 2. By denying to be judged by the Authority of any Grammarian, fince the 1000 Year of Chrift, as to the fignification of Words, I durft venture to defend, The Talmud never mentioned nor owned any Confonants to exift before them, there was only the found of them; The vowels and accents were in Writing and Figure, and by Custom they knew what confonants were to be added, And I will add this fhew of Reafon, There are many Points yet ftanding as Monuments of the Ancient Cuftom, without the confonants; these are in the Margin only, as formerly all were. Therefore I will leave him and turn to my Collections. In Lib. Nedarim, R. Fuchan is introduced faying, It is lawful to take a reward for the paufes or the accents. i. e. for teaching them. And Mur Zutra is recorded, deciding the Controverfies of the Law by thefe accents. And R. Ibuda in the Mifchna fays, Its not lawful for us to make any distinctions in the Verfes, which Mofes has not made. And Zobar to the like purpofe If all the Prophets were equal to Mofes, they had no power, neither to alter Letter nor Point of the Law. Obferve further, Many Copies of the Mifna are Poinetd both with vowels and accents.

I fhall conclude this Branch from the Talmud, with a Story out of Raban, who fays, In his time. (i. e. Anno Dom. 1000.) There was a great Book of punctation in their Library, which had been wrote by Raffe Afc or Afhe in Babylon, about Anno Chrifti 360. This was the Firft Author of the Babylonian Talmud, and therefore no late additament.

D 3

The