Duvduv

Don't worry. The schismatics were from the now fossilized Karaite sect, and there are good reasons to believe that they were never part of the normative community at all. But if you talk to Karaites today you will find out that they usually are not too sure of what they are supposed to believe and why.
You don't have to imagine. You cannot prove it one way or another. I use two sets which is the Sephardic and Hassidic practice.

The mishnah dealing with the placement of the parchments inside the boxes is intentionally ambiguous reflecting the possibility of different valid customs mandated by different rabbinical authorities going back to the beginning. The main obligatory custom is what are referred to as Rashi tefillin. But this whole subject is an entirely different "thread" probably not suited for this thread or Forum.

stephan huller

yeah right. the Karaites are preferable to the rabbanites

semiopen

Indeed, a discussion of Tefillim is not suitable to a Biblical Criticism and History forum because it was discussed in the Pentateuch, elucidated in the Talmud, and has been found in archaeological settings. This clearly has nothing to do with the Bible or History.

This is an excellent illustration of your absolute cluelessness.

Rabbenu Tam's Tefillin is discussed by Yehuda Cohn in Jewish Studies Quarterly 2007 (Volume 14)

Rabbenu Tam's Tefillin: An Ancient Tradition or the Product of Medieval Exegesis

Cohn compares Tefillin found in the Judean desert with Rabbenu Tam and Rashi concepts of parchment ordering. He also analyzes the biblical and talmudic commentary on the parchment contents.

I don't see support for your position

But you're probably right, Moses probably said the same thing when some jerk kept asking him.

stephan huller

the samaritans don't have tefillim.

Sheshbazzar

Are Samaritans Jewish?

Duvduv

Why are you so absolutist? Is Yehuda Cohn the final authority on the subject about which one may not dare disagree? When it comes to other subjects there are so many valid opinions, but here, so much information throughout the ages was in hiding until revealed by one particular writer in a journal article. Does he fall under Vatican I for academic infallibility?

And since there has been such a great historical conspiracy to promote rabbinic Judaism worldwide, would you care to shed light on the nerve center or headquarters of this conspiracy, regarding tefillin or anything else? However, I prefer not to get drawn into these kind of arguments. I am too busy focusing on verses from Revelation, Matthew and Mark and their context.

For a mere distraction why don't we discuss the theories for the real reasons why the pope resigned when his health is better than his predecessor's was for several years? What could be found out from Cardinals Scola or Bertone?

stephan huller

Not strictly speaking but because (a) people use the term 'Jewish' to mean 'the religion of Moses' and (b) they use this term inconsistently (= the Samaritans are Jewish enough to be subordinated by 'true Jews' but ignored in most discussions of the proper interpretation of the religion of Israel) we have to include them in any discussion of 'Jewishness.' IMO the Samaritans and Karaites are the closest surviving traditions to the original interpretation of the Pentateuch. I don't know enough about the Falashas other than to say they don't use the Mishnah so that's another point in their favor.

Duvduv

How on earth would you know that the Samaritans and karaites have the *original* interpretation when Karaite writers admitted that Karaites didn't agree with one another on anything.? See Daniel Qumisi, much less the Samaritans who rejected the holy books of the Karaites?!

stephan huller

Because (a) Gerizim was the original holy place of Israel and (b) the Pentateuch alone was the only source of legal authority. The process of corruption began with the lower ranks of Jewish society seizing what was traditionally the exclusive domain of the priests. The subordination of the Pentateuch to Gemara is a complete novelty and one of the greatest scandals in the history of monotheism. The way the Samaritans and Karaites interpret the Pentateuch is rational and consistent with the original principles of halakhah. Everything started on Gerizim. The narrative of the Pentateuch is centrally focused on the Samaritan locales because Gerizim was the original place the tabernacle resided in the land of Israel. There is no mention of Jerusalem because Jerusalem was not considered to be a holy place. The Samaritans are steadfast in their devotion to the Pentateuch and only the Pentateuch because they represent the original purity of the Israelite religion.

Duvduv

HOW do you know Gerizim was the original holy place of Israel? What *subordination*?! The Pentateuch is not "subordinated." The Pentateuch and the Gemara go hand in hand. HOW do the Karaites "interpret" the Pentateuch when they readily admit they have "traditions" which cannot be determined from the Pentateuch itself and have to rely on what they call "sevel hayerusha" (burden of inheritance) as how a baby should be circumcised or how an animal should be slaughtered??

And the Samaritans? What do you have to go on when an analysis of their Torah shows its reliance on targums for the use of words that differ from the Masoretic text? See Rabbi Chaim Heller's book.

*Everything* started on Gerizim? Who says? Don't tell a Karaite that, he'll punch you in the nose. Even the friend of the Samaritans who made off with manuscripts now in St. Petersburg, the Karaite Firkovich, would agree!
You still have not proven that Gerizim was the original holy place........

And although the Prophets and Chronicles (rejected by Samaritans but accepted by Karaites) mention Dan and Beth El and all types of idolatry, there is no mention at all of any early importance of Gerizim to any of the Ten Tribes at all, which one would expect from the "enemy" who inserted all types of "untruths" according to the Samaritans (i.e. Ezra the Scribe).