Frontlets Phylacteries
Frontlets Phylacteries [1]
Phylacteries, Frontlets . 1 . Among the charges brought by our Lord against the Pharisees of His day we read: ‘but all their works they do for to be seen of men: for they make broad their phylacteries and enlarge the borders of their garments’ ( Matthew 23:5-6; for ‘borders’ see Fringes). This is the only Biblical reference to one of the most characteristic institutions of the Judaism of the first century as of the twentieth. The word ‘phylactery’ (Gr. phylactçrion ) literally signifies a ‘safe-guard,’ as safe-guarding the wearer against the attacks of hurtful spirits and other malign influences such as the evil eye in other words, an amulet . By the Jews then as now, however, the phylacteries were termed tephillîn , the plural of the ordinary word for ‘prayer.’
2 . For information regarding the phylacteries of our Lord’s day we are dependent on the somewhat later allusions in the Mishna, with which the modern Jewish usage agrees in all essential points. Then, as now, they consisted of two small square cases or capsules of leather, ‘two finger-breadths’ according to the Talmud, say 1 1 / 2 inch, in the side, one of which was worn on the forehead, the other on the left upper arm. The leather had to be prepared from the skin of a ritually ‘clean’ animal, and was coloured a deep black.
The case for the forehead, which was termed the ‘head-tephillah,’ was distinguished from the ‘arm-’ or ‘hand-tephillah’ by its being shaped so as to give four small but distinct compartments, while its fellow consisted of a single compartment. In each of the four compartments of the former was placed a narrow strip of parchment, also from the skin of a ‘clean’ animal, having carefully written on it one of the Pentateuch passages which were regarded as the Scripture warrant for the institution of the phylacteries (see § 4 ). These were Exodus 13:1-16 , Deuteronomy 6:4-9; Deuteronomy 11:13-21 . The companion capsule, on the other hand, contained the same four passages written on a single strip of parchment. Each case was then closed by folding back the lower half of the square of stout leather from which it projected, space being left at the fold for the passing of a long strap, blackened on the upper side, by which each phylactery was kept in position when properly ‘laid.’ The strap of the head-phylactery was tied behind the head into a knot having the shape of the Hebrew letter daleth . On the two sides of the capsule were impressed the letter shîn , on one side with the usual three prongs, on the other with four prongs. The corresponding loop of the phylactery for the arm was supposed to form the letter yôd , the three letters together giving the sacred name Shaddai , ‘Almighty.’
3. From the Mishna we learn further that women, slaves, and minors were exempted from the obligation of wearing, or in technical phrase ‘laying,’ the tephillin, a duty still incumbent on all male Israelites, from the age of thirteen years and a day, during the recital of morning prayer, on all days save Sabbaths and festivals. These, being themselves ‘signs,’ rendered the phylacteries unnecessary for this purpose ( Exodus 13:9; cf. § 4 below). It is probable, however, that in our Lord’s time, as was the case later, the more zealous spirits among the Pharisees wore their phylacteries during the whole day.
In putting on the phylacteries that of the hand is ‘laid’ first, to the accompaniment of a prescribed prayer, and must lie on the inner side of the left arm, which must be bare, a little above the elbow, so that the case with the Scripture passages may rest upon the heart ( Deuteronomy 11:18 ). The strap is then drawn tight and wound round the arm and the middle finger of the left hand a prescribed number of times. (For details see Hastings’ Db [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] iii. 870.) The head-phylactery is next laid, its position being the middle of the forehead, ‘between the eyes’ ( Exodus 13:9 etc., see next §), with the knot above described at the back of the head, and the two ends of the strap brought forward to hang down over the breast in front. The phylacteries are taken off in the reverse order. When not in use, they are kept in a bag, which is often made of superior material richly ornamented (see illust. in Jewish Encyc., s.v. ’ Phylacteries’).
4 . The Scripture warrant for this peculiar institution of Judaism is found in the four passages, Exodus 13:9; Exodus 13:16 , Deuteronomy 6:8; Deuteronomy 11:18 . Of these Deuteronomy 6:8 may be quoted as the most explicit: ‘And thou shalt bind them’ i.e. ‘these words which I command thee this day,’ Deuteronomy 6:6 ‘for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes.’ These words and their parallels in the other passages, it is maintained by Jewish and some Christian scholars, are intended by their authors to be taken literally. This contention has been examined in detail in the corresponding article in Hastings’ Db [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] (iii. 870 72). The result is a verdict in favour of the figurative interpretation of all the passages, including that just cited. A good deal turns on the sense of the word rendered ‘ frontlets ’ ( tôtâphôth ). This rendering (cf. Oxf. Heb. Lex . ‘bands,’ ‘frontlet-bands’) cannot be maintained in face of the evidence for the rendering ‘jewel’ or ‘amulet,’ the meaning which the word has in the Heb. text of Sir 36:3 (= Av [Note: Authorized Version.] Sir 33:3 ), as read by Smend in his edition of the text and commentary (both 1906): ‘the law is for the wise man an amulet, a band (or knot) upon the hand.’ In Mishna, also, Shabbath , vi. 1, 5, tôtepheth signifies an ornament in a lady’s head-dress.
We conclude, then, that the Pentateuch writers really intended by these metaphors to impress upon God’s people that His word was to be to them a treasure more precious than any jewel. The figures were derived from the prevailing custom of wearing jewels on the forehead and on the wrists both as ornaments and as amulets (see Amulets, Ornaments). On the other hand, if the literal interpretation is followed, we should have to recognize another of the numerous instances in the Hebrew legislation, in which a deeply rooted and ineradicable practice of heathen origin and superstitious associations was adopted and given a religious signification, precisely as was done with the kindred sign of the tassels on the corners of the mantle (see Fringes, end).
5 . The date at which this literal interpretation was first given effect to and the wearing of the phylacteries introduced cannot be determined with certainty. The fact that the institution is unknown to the Samaritans shows that it must have arisen after the date of the Samaritan schism. The passage of Jesus Sirach above quoted (written c [Note: circa, about.] . b.c. 180 170) seems to imply that the figurative interpretation still held the field. On the other hand, the writer of the famous ‘Letter of Aristeas’ (scarcely later than b.c. 90) distinctly mentions (§ 159 ) the binding of ‘the sign upon the hand’ (see Thackeray’s tr. [Note: translate or translation.] In Jqr [Note: Qr Jewish Quarterly Review.] xv. 368 f.). We may, therefore, with some confidence assign the introduction of the phylacteries to the period of the domination of the Pharisees in the reign of John Hyrcanus (b.c. 135 105).
Even in the first century of our era it is very doubtful if the practice extended beyond the Pharisees and their adherents, who showed their zeal for religion by the size of the cases and the breadth of the straps by which they were fastened. Certainly the mass of the Jewish people at this date, ‘who knew not the law’ ( John 7:49 ), paid no heed to such literalism; neither, we may be sure, did Jesus or His disciples.
In popular estimation, as is shown by the very name ‘phylacteries’ (§ 1 ), and by references in Targum and Talmud, the phylacteries were regarded as powerful amulets. In the Middle Ages they seem to have fallen from the absurdly exaggerated esteem in which they were held in Talmudic times. This was no doubt due to the fact that some of the most influential Jewish exegetes still frankly maintained the figurative interpretation of the cardinal passages of the Pentateuch. In more modern times, however, the practice of ‘laying the tephillîn’ has revived, and is now universal in orthodox Jewish circles.
