Talk:Essenes/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Unjustified Assertions

This page has numerous unjustified assertions -- especially in the introductory paragraph. In particular, the assertion that the Essenes believed themselves to the be the last generation is not found in either Jewish War or Antiquities. I did a grep for all reference to the word "generation" and reviewed all matching text. There was no reference to the Essenes having any such belief.

Over all, it looks like the current state of the introductory paragraph assumes that the Essenes wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls and then attributes to the Essenes ideas found in the scrolls without there being clear proof that they did. Whether or not they wrote the scrolls is a matter being hotly debated and it is not reasonable to write as if it established fact. Most Essene websites claim they never wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.

I do re-iterate my comments below, that there is no reference to the "High Guard Messiah" or the "Aaronic Priesthood" in Josephus. Unless there are objections -- backed up by appropriate citations, I intend to remove the most outlandish claims from the introductory paragraph.

Removed unsupported assertions about the "High Guard Messiah" and the false claim that all Essenes were celibate

I tried not to add any unsupported assertions of my own (but it was tempting, we all have our theories). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lowell Boggs (talk • contribs) 02:17, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

"When Pythagoras founded a religious movement called Pythagoreanism, the Greeks became greatly influenced by the Atlantean culture." What is 'the Atlantean culture'? MrSativa (talk) 03:06, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I just removed that and a lot more recently added, unsubstantiated material. Raquel Baranow (talk) 03:09, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Why is the Essenes topic under a "Jewish Project" as the Essenes are a logical and arguably a manifestation of pre Jesus Christianity? 2601:280:4400:15B1:DD40:BAB8:ADC7:AF9E (talk) 00:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC)Sam

Introductory para

my edit to the introduction I believe gives a better synopsis of the Essenian people, their way of life, and the thus a better picture of who they are. Also, I removed the reference to them believing they where only gods chosen people, for it was unclear whether the quotations marks where an actual quote (if so, required a source or reference) or if it was just a punctuation mark to portray the authors individual disagreement with the claim. Either way, it wasn't to wikipedia standards. I also removed the tricky sentence about them being isolated and east of the Dead Sea. It wasn't clear if "isolation" was refering to their attempt to have little out side influence on their lives, or if it meant isolated in a geological since. If the later, the Essenians where not isolated geologically nor did they live only near the dead sea. Josephus said "No one city is theirs, but they settle amply in each." Yet they where isolated in the since that they did not let others of a different sect into their homes nor share their communal goods which i believe the edited version portrays fact better. Bryanpeterson (talk) 18:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

yes, but they are also said to have lived on the western shore of the dead sea. scholars today believe that essenes came in two varieties: those that married and lived in cities, and those that lived in isolated communities. can you rewrite to reflect both? thanx. IsraelXKV8R (talk) 18:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference List

Is someone going to fix the reference list? I can't even locate the sources. Are they journal articles or treatises, etc?

mostly fixed.  —Chris Capoccia ^T⁄_C 21:35, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I am confused about the phrase "last generation of last generations". I searched this page: http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/JOSEPHUS.HTM, and its child pages, looking for the that phrase and could not find it. Also the references to "high guard messiah" sounds like something from the Andromeda TV show rather than anything I've read (admittedly limited) of the Essenes. The phrase "Aaronic Priesthood" sounds like something from Mormonism. I searched Google for references to these phrases and am finding lots of people copying and pasting the wikipedia article -- particularly these undocumented phrases, but no real references using those terms connected with the Essenes. To me, these phrases seem like someone with an agenda redacting the material. Lowell Boggs (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I did some checking on the history of these phrases. They appear to have been added about May of 2009 by osprey9713 who had a "sock puppet" investigation done on him on May 18, 2009. Given the number of exact copies of this text appearing on various websites all over the net, referring to this article, one would hope that the guardians of the article would either demand references or remove the material. Lowell Boggs (talk) 02:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hasid sect

As far as I know, to refer to the Essenes as a Hasid sect is anachronistic, the Baal Shem Tov not having begun the Hasidic movement until the 18th century C.E. If the word Hasid is meant in a different way, the author should please explain his or her use of the term.

There was a group called the hasidim IIRC just before the maccabees. ems (not to be confused with the nonexistant pre-dating account by the same name) 17:22, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

removed links

I removed the links to a few websites which are apparently modern groups claiming to know some esoteric stuff about the old essenes. I think it'd be much better to stick only to historical material, new agey stuff should be avoided because even if there are some historical groundings in some of what's on those sites, a lot of it is probably made up. Modern-day groups calling themselves "essenes" shouldn't be references for this article. Flammifer 12:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps a disambiguation page or other use section listing different usages. Kuratowski's Ghost 16:26, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

The best would probably be something about how the name is still popular today, because of their history - the claims that they are the "true" Christians, that Jesus was one of them, etc.

Heh, I'm pretty sure that in the San Francisco Bay Area alone you can find modern versions of just about any ancient religious or secret group ^-^ I'm not sure they're all worthy of coverage, though the essenians may deserve particular attention. Flammifer 02:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Since there was already a sentence about "modern Essenes", I split it off into a section and made it explicit that this is the claim of these new religious movements that they are the spiritual heirs of the Essenes. (The previous version could have been read as saying that the Essenes survived to the modern day, which they didn't.)

I also noticed that one of these NRMs has put a link on the bottom of the page, which may or may not be kosher (pun intended) — if it is going to be on the page, though, its nature ought to be stated clearly. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:37, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Can someone provide citations for the claim that John the Baptist is widely regarded as an Essense? I believe this is correct but I'd just like to see the statment referenced with a citation. Thanks

64.121.40.153 09:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)Gio

A lot of this stuff (esp. History) seems awfully close to propaganda, or whatever one might call it in the case of the Essenes. If someone could clean it up and make it POV, that'd improve the article and maybe make it a little less confusing to the lay reader.

64.121.40.153 09:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)Gio

It is most probable that they descended from the Hasidim of pre-Hasmonean times who aligned with Judas Maccabbee against Antiochus Epiphanies IV about 170 B.C

Twzinn 14:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

"Nasarean Bible of the Essene Way"?

I'm unfamiliar with this text, and couldn't find anything by this name using Google. I'm highly inclined to remove the paragraph about it from the "Scholarly discussion" section, as it sounds to me like supposition cobbled together by someone affiliated with one of the aforementioned "Essene" new religious movements. Can anyone vouch for this text or the article's claims about it? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I share Josiah's question and also agree with his inclination. The title already sounds like a modern fabrication, and the only two links google provided this one here and that one there. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 19:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Good on you, Str1977. I've removed one more mention of the "Nasarean Bible of the Essene Way". The Mary Magdalene link you provided speaks for itself, IMO. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Classical Sources

The current section on rules and customs is far from complete, and seems to arbitrarily mention a selection of what is said about them by Josephus and Pliny. It also makes no mention that there are contradictions. Would a complete listing of the points made by the sources be out of place or too detailed here? Thoughts? If positive, I'll rewrite the section as a parallel list (better for comparison). Also, whilst "From what has been deduced, the food of the Essenes was not allowed to be altered (by being cooked, for instance); and they may have been strict vegetarians, eating mostly bread, wild roots and fruits." has been marked with a citation tag, I think it really should go. Even 'deduced' is far too strong; no scholar could possibly assert this with more strength that pure conjecture (from parallels) as our sources are silent on the matter. Tobermory 12:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Even WITH sources, this piece would be problematic: "the food of the Essenes was not allowed to be altered (by being cooked, for instance); and they may have been strict vegetarians, eating mostly bread, wild roots and fruits".

They would not eat "altered" (whatever that might mean) or cooked food, but ate a lot of bread? "I refuse to eat McDonald's food and live on a diet of Big Macs and Happy Meals." Mdbrownmsw 19:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

-Philo of Alexandria predates Pliny the elder. Philo probably did not live to see the reign of Nero, and Pliny wrote his Natural History under the Flavians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.177.114.33 (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Crucifixion

Do we actually know that first century Essenes believed in their own founding Teacher of Righteousness who was crucified? I'd like to see a source for that, considering what Rules One and Two say in that case. Dan 08:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Essenes / Masons

Often books titled "Rites of the Essenes" turn up, usually in a form of cypher. These books contain the ritual for the first three degrees of Freemasonry (United States) and the title is a somewhat transparent effort to disguise this. In the ritual itself the cypher form Essn is used to replace Mason because it is somewhat similar.--Saxophobia 16:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

calendar

I would like to see a discussion, from someone with more than my fragmentary knowlege, about the Essene version of the Hebrew calendar (it's not disscussed there, either) It was purely lunar--and perhaps is an interesting forerunner of the Muslim calendar. The Essenes laid great streess on the unrighteousness of the mainstream Jews in sacrificing on the wrong dates. DGG 07:27, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Good idea, but I think you mean "purely solar". Essene writings like Enoch and Jubilees are adamant that anyone who pays any attention to the moon is going astray, and outline a strictly solar calendar. I may do something on this soon, if I get the time. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 11:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I stand corrected. The point was indeed that they relied on a fixed approximate numerical sequence, without referring to when the new moon actually appeared or was calculated to appear. You did induce me to reread Enoch, (using the convenient public domain version on http://www.sacred-texts.com) . Fortunately, the arithmetic in ch 72 & 74 is summarized in ch 82: the months were of 30 and 31 days according to a fixed sequence; the year was 364 days= the 360 from ordinary 30-day months and the 4 extra. Not only was there no provision for leap year, but also there was no allowance for the 365th day, so it would fall behind the seasons 1 ¼ days a year, or 125 days a century. The apparent reason to disregard the 365th day seems to have been to make the 4 seasons of a year equal, for otherwise they just would have needed a 5th long month. On to Jubilees, but not today. DGG 03:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

What can be said more accurately is not that the Essenes used such a calendar but that it is described in the Dead Sea Scrolls (and the book of Enoch, as noted above) and that no other calendar is described in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The connection between the Essenes and the Dead Sea Scrolls remains hypothetical, so it is more appropriate to refer to it as the Qumran calendar. As to the Qumran calendar itself, it is important to note that the Passover month begins on Wednesday and lasts for 30 days, the next month begins on Friday and lasts for 30 days, and the following month begins on Sunday and lasts for 31 days, resulting in a 91-day calendar quarter (13 weeks). The Wednesday-Friday-Sunday cycle repeats during each of the four quarters of the year. This means that Passover (15 Nisan), Rosh Hashanah (1 Tishri), and Sukkot (15 Tishri) always fall on Wednesdays, while Yom Kippur (10 Tishri) always falls on a Friday. This is significant, because the rules of the standard Hebrew calendar prohibit Rosh Hashanah from ever falling on a Wednesday, Friday, or Sunday. That means: Passover (always 163 days before Rosh Hashanah) can never fall on a Monday, Wednesday, or Friday; Yom Kippur (9 days after Rosh Hashanah) can never fall on a Friday, Sunday, or Tuesday; and Sukkot (14 days after Rosh Hashahah) can never fall on a Wednesday, Friday, or Sunday. Thus, these holidays can never fall on the same day in both the Qumran calendar and in the Hebrew calendar as it is known today (and since at least the period of late antiquity). The well-known incident in the Dead Sea Scrolls in which the Wicked Priest visits the Community on Yom Kippur should probably be understood with reference to the differences between the Qumran calendar and the Hebrew calendar. If it was Yom Kippur for the Qumran community, it must have been Friday; however, Friday could not have been Yom Kippur for the so-called Wicked Priest if he used a calendar similar to the Hebrew calendar as we know it today. One should also note that the Didache, generally viewed as an early Christian document with pre-Christian Jewish sources, enjoins fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays. Such fasting was also the custom of the early Christian church, which survives in Eastern Orthodoxy, in the Ember Days of the Roman Catholic and Anglican Churches, and in the Irish and Scottish Gaelic languages' names for Wednesday as "First Fast" ("An Chéadaoin" / "Dé Céadaoin") and Friday as "Fast" ("An Aoine" / "Dé hAoine"), with Thursday being the "Day Between the Fasts" ("An Déardaoin" / "Déardaoin"). This does not, however, prove that early Christians were a continuation of the Qumran tradition. The Christian practice of fasting on Wednesday could have originated as a way of negating its use as a religious feast day (where fasting would be inappropriate), just as the modern Hebrew calendar does so through a system of rules that prevent certain feasts from falling on Wednesday, as discussed above. There are many possibilities. What is clear, however, is that both Josephus and the Dead Sea Scrolls suggest that there was a greater heterogeneity of religious practice in Israel during the classical period than we have generally been inclined to suspect. -- Bob Bob99 (talk) 21:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

On the question directed to the problem of keeping the 364-day Qumran calendar in sync with the approximately 365.25 day length of the solar year, it is possible that there was an undocumented one-week intercalation every seven years, following the Jubilee cycle, which would be equivalent to a 365-day year. Thus, there would be a loss of approximately 25 days a century. If a second week was intercalated every 49 years (again following the Jubilee cycle), the loss would be approximately 11 days a century. Even this discrepancy, however, means that the Qumran calendar would have become noticeably out of sync with the actual solar year (and with a lunisolar calendar such as the Hebrew calendar) within a few generations, unless there were intercalations based on a system of observations (such as might be accomplished by constructing a comparatively simple (by classical Middle Eastern standards) astronomical observatory similar to the medicine wheels used by Native Americans for this purpose, which might have been well suited to an environment such as the barren area around Qumran). All of this, however, is pure speculation. We don't want to be taken for the five and twenty people worshiping the sun, whom Ezekiel describes (Ezekiel 8:16) in what could, for all we know, be a disapproving early reference to predecessors of the Qumran community. -- Bob Bob99 (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about riding a hobbyhorse (calendars), but, to that part of the question above implicitly asking whether the Muslim calendar has forerunners, answer is almost certainly that it does not have any forerunners other than the (more or less) known lunisolar calendars of the region at the time of the foundation of Islam. In the very early days of Islam, Muslims used a version of the Hebrew calendar. Apparently, however, there was more than one system of intercalation (i.e., adding an extra month during 7 out of every 19 years) in use by Jews in the Arabian peninsula, and the use of one system versus another was apparently an identity issue between different factions of the broader Jewish community. Ultimately, it was decreed that Islamic religious duties would be determined by a calendar that did not use any system of intercalation, resulting in the Muslim calendar as it is known today. Pre-Islamic agriculture calendars, however, were retained for practical use, which is why Iran continues to use a calendar based on the Zoroastrian calendar and why Muslims in Egypt and the Levant have historically had observances tied to the date of Easter. (See, e.g., the article on Thursday of the Dead) These factoids do not directly implicate the Essenes, of course. However, in view of (i) some of the theories on the Essenes as possibly non-Jewish in origin and (ii) their possible connection to the Qumran calendar (where the Passover month begins on a Wednesday), it is interesting to note the cultural importance in the Iranian solar calendar of the last Wednesday before the vernal equinox celebration of Nowruz. -- Bob Bob99 (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Correction

At the end of the scholar section there is a parenthesis to Jonathan Maccabaeus, "(no of priestly lineage)". Jonathan was a member of the same family as Judas, which we call "Hasmonean". This family was certainly priestly.

--Ihutchesson 11:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Epiphanius quote

The article contains the following quote from Epiphanius:

"The Nazarean - they were Jews by nationality - originally from Gileaditis [where the early followers of Yeshua fled after the martyrdom of James, the brother of Jesus], Bashanitis and the Transjordon . . .They acknowledged Moses and believed that he had received laws - not this law, however, but some other. And so, they were Jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. They considered it unlawful to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the fathers. This was the difference between the Nazarean and the others. . ." (Panarion 1:18)

This quote seems fine except for the passage in brackets, which I highlighted here. To me this doesn't sound like a 4th century bishop. At least the name form Yeshua seems to be wrong. Now, I do not know whether someone just "mis"translated the name or whether the bracketted passage is alltogether an edition by someone quoting it one the net, which has been copied again and again. I will therefore fact tag it for the moment but if neither I nor anyone else can find proper evidence for that passage, I will delete it. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 22:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I have pursued this further and confirmed that it was an intrusion into the quote. I have removed it accordingly. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 22:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

But then again, the whole passage is questionable as far as it's actually referring to the Essenes is concerned. We need a serious scholarly secondary source (not a contemporary "Essene" website):

The Church Father Epiphanius (writing in the fourth century AD) seems to make a distinction between two main groups within the Essenes: "Of those that came before his [Elxai, an Ossaean prophet] time and during it, the Osseaens and the Nazarean." (Panarion 1:19). Epiphanius describes each group as following:

• "Nazarean" Essenes:

"The Nazarean - they were Jews by nationality - originally from Gileaditis, Bashanitis and the Transjordon . . .They acknowledged Moses and believed that he had received laws - not this law, however, but some other. And so, they were Jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. They considered it unlawful to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the fathers. This was the difference between the Nazarean and the others. . ." (Panarion 1:18)

• "Ossaeanes" Essenes:

"After this [Nazarean] sect in turn comes another closely connected with them, called the Ossaeanes. These are Jews like the former ... originally came from Nabataea, Ituraea, Moabitis and Arielis, the lands beyond the basin of what sacred scripture called the Salt Sea. . . Though it is different from the other six of these seven sects, it causes schism only by forbidding the books of Moses like the Nazarean." (Panarion 1:19)

Some modern groups who claim a connection with Essenism also claim the location of the Ossaeanes, who encouraged celibacy, to have been around the Qumran area; and the Nazarean, who encouraged marriage, to have been around the Mount Carmel area.

What is also questioble is to include Osman in a serious scholarly section. Being pseudo-scholarship, he cannot contribute to the etymology issue.

The Essenes have been the focus of much alternative history and esoteric speculation. Recently, for example, Ahmed Osman claims in his book Out of Egypt that the name "Essene" is to be translated as "follower of Jesus (Essa)." This "obvious" translation had been overlooked, it is claimed, because of a previously unquestioned assumption that the origins of Christianity lay in the first century AD.

Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 22:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Epiphanius is one of our primary sources on the Essenes and the article is incomplete if it does not address this. Please put something about Epiphanius back into the article ASAP! Thanks! ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 22:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Codex, if someone can provide a RS that this quote is indeed referring to the Essenes I have no objections to include it again. Please understand that I am a bit suspicious after finding it on neo-Essene websites, in an amplified version.

However, I do not think that Epiphanius is a very important source about the Essenes (no reason to not include him still) - these are Josephus, Plinius, Philo and, if we accept the Essene paradigm (as we should), the Dead Sea Scrolls. Thanks for your consideration. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 23:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

There are not that many ancient authorities that tell us anything abou the Essenes or even mention the name, but Epiphanius is certainly one of the few that we do have that mentions the name and tells anything about them, and not mentioning him in this article for whatever reason is outrageous! For example he claims that the "Essenes" were a Samaratin branch, and that the Jerusalem branch were called "Ossenes"... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe he is also the one who claims the name Essene comes from Jesse ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 00:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I see that the name "Ossaeans" is close to Essenes and that the location at the Dead Sea is also interesting, but I cannot yet see conclusive evidence via literature that these are the same or connected. What he says about them forbidding the books of Moses contradicts what we know about the Essenes (as would such talk about Samaritan connections). Another peculiarity is his writing in the present tense whereas the Essenes ended over two hundred years before his time.

In any case, you don't need to convince me. I never had any objections to this passage. But we don't yet have conclusive evidence that this is about the Essenes. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 09:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

All we have to do is report what Epiphanius said and what many sources have interpreted this to mean about the Essenes... also apparently he did use the spelling Iessaoi at one point [1]. It doesn't matter if we, you or I personally find him thoroughly convincing; although I don't know if anyone has made the case that his Ossaeans were not at all connected with the Essenes, several certainly have made the case that they were... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:05, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Codex, apparently you misunderstand me, so I will repeat it once again: Who says that Epiphanius is talking about the Essenes? Once someone confirms this I will restore the quotes.

And since I see that Lighfoot is doing this, I will restore them now. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 17:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

POV alert

There seems to be a lot of POV muddle in the Scholar Research section. Perhaps this can be cleaned up by someone who knows more about this than me? --Mashford 16:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC) This is outrageous, I spent three years studying the Essenes ( all the books about them). there is No POV. My deleted contribution are all from European scholars ( christians Jews and athiests) I just reported the points that are mentioned by Dr Al-Kadhi and they are all in these books.

who is supposed to write in the Scholars section anyway? where this Zarathustran relation comes from? No sholar I read ever said they were gnostics, only some stupid websites franchising for their stuff and promoting by using the Essenes name. However all the internet stuff like this is collected and mentioned in "scholarly discussion" even though no Essenes Scholars said that. The books that evidence that Essenes were the christians are more than 5 as far as my knowledge goes. The only argument between the scholars whether Essenes were christians ( anti judaism) or pro judaism ( friends of the pharaisees)

Just as discussed on Talk:Palestinian people, one cannot place unsourced opinion or commentary in articles. -- Avi 04:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I strongly concur, and further urge editors to sign their posts. Thanks! --Mashford 03:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

All the info in my contribution I read in books from the public libray ( I spent 3 years on this topic) However I put a reference Geza Vermes: The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls Collection, Cambridge University---It is the best book on Essenes and Dead Sea Scrolls, every thing in my contribution is there, I hope you don't ask me to put the same reference for every sentence in my contrib. as the same book and a different page number, Gees.---Awl Man The IP editor who been violated by people who demand references even though the Scholarly discussion is full of unrefernced c.---

Remember, bringing references does not allow for original synthesis to performed on those references. Te reference HAS to say what you are adding to the text; no more, no less. -- Avi 14:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC) I will remember Mr Avi: However Prof. Al-Kadhi published book is not original synthesis. You bunch all you do is cut and revert back to cut, If you are so knowledgable why don't add references against my references. What about the Section before mine in Scholarly section: Where in the world any scholars of the Essenes ever said they were Agnostic or Zarathostrians or Phythagorians? the references is a web site of unrelated people who have no scholarly resources!!!! The Essenes were Yahadis ( onness of god) where does that fit in dualism? you cut my work that is referenced by Geza Vermes the highest authoritiy on Dead Sea Scrolls and essenes and let that website? this is a farce and it will show on wiki in the future, wiki will not be believable in the near future.63.226.128.37

Some random points:
1. Vermes' is/was a strong proponent of the Essene hypothesis, and he doesn't address the (admittedly mainly more recent) problems raised against the consensus theory. There are other competing scholarly views, but the designation of the Qumran writings as simply - or indeed often at all - agnostic, Zoroastrian, Pythagorean or whatever group the author thinks will sell him some books is, frankly, bizarre. Classification is hugely problematic, and in any case religion in the region was a continuum of cross-influenced groups and sects. Everyone recognises there are some problems with ALL proposed solutions to the "designation" problem, but the Essene hypothesis forms a model and framework upon which other ideas can be hung.
2. Vermes is not the "highest authority" and his introduction is not the "best book", but one of a number of good (basic) introductions. Vanderkam / Schiffman / Shanks, amongst others, have also published more recent, standard introductions that offer rather less clear-cut views. (As an aside, if you're going to do several years private study on a topic, then at least get reading rights at your local university library. Public libraries can hold some quite - I can think of no better word - scary texts ...)
3. YHD is "unity"/"oneness"; there is no inherent "of God" to that word. Whether it is simply a theologically-loaded name used by the community mentioned in "sectarian" (yes - I'm aware that's a simplistic designation) Qumran documents (as per Vermes) to refer to themselves, or rather is a name used for the abstract (but for them, very real and defining) concept of a union between the community and the angels, is another matter.
4. If this section is to assume the "sectarian" Qumran documents reflect the beliefs of an Essene group, my summary of themes at the 1QS article might be helpful : 1QS as a core document has very strong theological themes which could be (circularly?) argued to be "Essene" for the purpose of this article.
5. But to be honest, I'm not sure this Essenes article should be stating Essene theology based on the DSS at all. Rather, there should be a section comparing what we "know" (now there's a tricky question! And this article does not deal with it yet ...) from the primary sources that name the Essenes to the theological themes found in the DSS. Leave the categorisation of DSS theology to DSS articles, and concentrate here on the Essenes. Tobermory 03:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Esaion?

Does anyone have a reference/some references for this paragraf: According to a controversial view put forward by Dead Sea Scrolls Scholar Géza Vermes, both Josephus and Philo pronounced the essenes name as "Esaoin", which means in Arabic followers of "Esa", which Vermes says is the name of Jesus according to the most ancient mosaic portrait found in Turkey dated 70 A.D. which says underneath "Esa our Lord". Mainstream scholars usually stress a number of fundamental differences between Dead Sea Scroll theology and early Christian theology to argue that the Essenes cannot be considered identical to any kind of Christianity. I haven't found anything (of course I could look some more - but it would be easier if...) to support it. It caugth my attention because it seems at like a bit far out theory for súch an esteemed scholar --Ktp72 18:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

It is Muslim propaganda.--Ari89 (talk) 05:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, here's this site [2] to show it may not be "Muslim propaganda". Look for Nasareans and you'll see the quotes fresh from Josephus the Traitor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.112.123 (talk) 09:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

No, it really is Muslim propaganda. Since there is no literary link for the Quranic use of Isa/Esa as opposed to Yasu they have taken the role of inventing claims. With regard to your claim that the Essene.com website claims it, I highly doubt it as they say "Yahshua - Phonetic spelling of Yeshua." Although most of the site is rubbish, they are smart enough to know what Jesus' name was.--Ari89 (talk) 08:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The Nasaraeans article is just a quote from an ancient source, and nothing more. And that quote is already included in this article, so I think we can simply redirect Nasaraeans here and be done with it. Nothing to merge.-Andrew c 01:37, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding content below in case anyone wants to mine the data. —Viriditas | Talk 02:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

ʺThe Nasaraeans ‐ they were Jews by nationality ‐ originally from Gileaditis, Bashanitis and the Transjordon . . .They acknowledged Moses and believed that he had received laws ‐ not this law, however, but some other. And so, they were Jews who kept all the Jewish observances, but they would not offer sacrifice or eat meat. They considered it unlawful to eat meat or make sacrifices with it. They claim that these Books are fictions, and that none of these customs were instituted by the fathers. This was the difference between the Nasaraeans and the others." - Epiphanius' Panarion 1:18 Others (like Reuven Kimelman) suggest that the Nasareans may have been Jewish-Christians. See: Reuven Kimelman, "Birkat Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity," in *Jewish and Christian Self-Definition,* vol. 2, ed. E.P. Sanders (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 226-244,

NO MERGE :i vote not to merge the 'nasaraeans' article here.

Promoted Ilani Article citing Elior

someone in israel added the ilani article in ha'aretz to the reference list. i also promoted the citation to a reference in the body of the text.IsraelXKV8R (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

A question for Rachel Elior

If Josephus invented the Essenes, how can they also be mentioned in Pliny and Philo? Das Baz 18:51, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that sentence should maybe read 'Some scholars have rejected the identification of the Essenes with the Qumran group, for eg. Hillel Newman, M.H. Gottstein, C.Roth, G R Driver, B J Roberts etc, and Rachel Elior, even that the Essenes existed.' Personally Ive never read any scholar that denied the Essenes existence.Sayerslle (talk) 00:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC) Also in the first paragraph where it says the scrolls are 'commonly believed' to be an Essene library, I think that may have been true in the very early times after their discovery but that it is no longer true.92.3.16.188 (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

ok, but no matter how many of us question whether or not it was the essenes, it is still the commonly held view. i too question it, but that does not make the view any less commonly held (well, maybe by one ;-). IsraelXKV8R (talk) 13:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

No, Daz Baz has a point. Prof. Rachel Elior seemingly does claim that the Essenes were a utopian literary invention and never actually existed. A recent Times (of London) article on the matter quotes her as follows:

“I believe any serious scholar truly can’t but admit that the law reflected in the scrolls is a Sadducee law,” she said, pointing out that there were no corroborating historical records, either in Jewish or early Christian literature, to indicate that a large sect of celibate men lived in the area over a long period of time.

“The Essenes are only a literary invention of a Utopian society that lived a most benevolent and chaste life,” she told The Times.

The confusion arose from scholars using other, later texts as their sources, she said, noting that the Jewish-Roman scholar Josephus mentioned them, but that he was writing hundreds of years later.

However, in my copy of Josephus's The Jewish War (admittedly an English translation), he appears in the relevant passages to be describing the circumstances of his own present day (ca 70CE), not those pertaining "hundreds" of years previously. He expends 4 pages of text exclusively on the Essenes, whom he says comprise two orders, one of which maintains personal celibacy but which adopts others' children, the other of which does marry and reproduce. None of this seems to bear out Prof. Elior's assertions, such as they have been reported.87.81.230.195 (talk) 12:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

i have reworded the line in the second paragraph to distinguish scholars who dispute whether the essenes wrote the dss (of which there are a few), and elior, who claims they never existed. the two claims are different. i shall add refs for some scholars who claim the essenes did not write the dss. IsraelXKV8R (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I felt that Rachel Elior received undue attention at the beginning of this article. I clicked on the citation and it seemed spurious. And reading here, it sounds like her opinion is unique and somewhat unfounded. Should she receive this advertisement? I somehow found myself, without reading the rest of the article, which was what i had meant to do, at the discussion on the DSS. That war between Israel and RG, OMg! took me a long time to read it all, but quite entertaining. way to go israel! anyway, perhaps Elior does not need this mention, it detracted from the article. Literedball (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Prof. Elior claimed that Josephus invented the Essenes. She may have misunderstood Steve Mason's claim that Josephus invented *married* Essenes (a claim that is itself doubtful). Then she said, in effect, okay, then Philo invented Essenes. Her claim, so oblivious to relevant sources, carries no weight. Why would Josephus invent a "gate of the Essenes" or Judah, Menahen, and Simon the Essene, who all lived before he was born. Mason, IMO correctly follows Abraham Schalit, Namenwörterbuch zu Flavius Josephus, that "John the Essene" is a chimera, a mis-reading. A further caution to Elior's claim is the problem of retrojecting later Zadokites (diachronically increasingly dufferent) as if Second Temple period Sadducees. Joseph Baumgarten, of blessed memory, was more careful in making comparisons over time.Coralapus (talk) 10:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Coralapus

ever/never lol.

good eyes. thanx for the correction. made my day colourful. IsraelXKV8R (talk) 01:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

'Scholarly Discussion'

As it stands, it is disgusting. I have removed some of the challenged and unsourced sections and will work on the section over the next few days. As it stood (and still stands) it is a very poor and inaccurate presentation of scholarly discussion. If we are going to devote the majority of the scholarly discussion to the never accepted (and frankly, a rehash of dead 19th-century scholarship) ideas of Martin Larson we might as well add every other fringe pseudo-scholarship as a defining feature in Second Temple Judaism. --Ari89 (talk) 15:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok Ari89 there is the latest research on the theory of Essenes published in European Journal. I have COI as it is my work but i think it deserves getting a place here being peer reviewed by biblical scholars and is published online. Can you decide on this that this work deserves some respect to be added for the view of the public who have a right to get insight into latest as you also mentioned up? It's not rehashed of dead 19th-century scholarship. it's latest. Please read this and assist me in putting it at this section in your own words. regards.

{In 2017, a research paper for the first time, employed "Five-Pronged Juxtaposing" approach, i.e. references from Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), Second Temple Judaism, early Christian history, the history of the Roman Empire and astounding connections found in the Qurʾān. This research claims that Quran also talks about Essenes once "Juxtaposing John’s “chaste” quality from a reference in Qurʾān with the same quality found in the Essenes compels the same yardstick to be used that was applied in linking the Essenes’ “chaste” quality with the Qumran community based on references in Josephus and Pliny". This theory claims that internal evidence from the Qurʾān forces scholars to see that the Essenes, John, and Jesus were all together at one point, at one time in one community. This research concludes that Seven Sleepers of the Cave were Essenes follower of Jesus who ran away from fear of Pharisees and Sadducees from 34-70 CE instead of 251 CE. According to the researcher, once these Essenes Sleepers woke up, based on the Qurʾānic timeline of 309 years, the year was probably between 339-400 CE, in same years, Trinitarianism was accepted as the Roman state religion in 381 CE. Probably, being empowered, linked it with Decius’ persecution of 250 CE to dominate and own it".}Rashid37009 (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

References

Enoch as an Essene

I remember reading somewhere that Enoch was claimed to be an Essene, in a similar way that Jesus was thought to have been one. It would be interesting if we could re-trace relevant sources on this. ADM (talk) 01:56, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

---

the wikipedia article on this subject is obviously written by christians of the modern sort with the express purpose being to discredit the Essenes. Talk about pov. As usual, all that happens on wikipedia is that the ignorant cherry pick their data, bounce around a lot of esoteric references, and pretend they know things in depth when they have only the most shallow of understandings. Pathetic. Wikipedia should be ashamed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.104.74 (talk) 22:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

santa barbara?? the preceding comment makes little sense. what is a 'christian of the modern sort'? as opposed to a christian of the ancient sort? who is discrediting essenes? are there some today that we should credit? (and dr. elior wants to know if they ever even existed!) 'the ignorant cherry pick their data' - what other credible data is out there? 'esoteric references' = only esoteric to the ignorant/unread. the informed know where the references are (how are wiki users ignorant again??) this is probably why you didn't sign your post. ;-) XKV8R (talk) 23:23, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

An antonym? Did they mean "succession'?

Is the first sentence saying that the Essenes claimed "secession" (a split) or "succession" (descendency) from the Zadokites? This is a case of antonyms that are nearly homophonic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.230.234.246 (talk) 21:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Another view

I would luv to see done a comparative analysis of the written works presented in this article versus the "readings" of the famed psychic Edgar Cayce. I know he's not going to be exactly "scholarly" material, however he did provide a very detailed view of Essene life and purpose. As well as his famous prediction of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Moved here from Ebionites

• The Ebionites shared many doctrines and practices with the Essenes, and possibly with those at Qumran.
• The Qumran community referred to themselves by many epithets, including "the poor".

(Did they? It's an OT quote, so what?) name="Harris">Harris, Stephen L. (1985) Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield, ISBN 1-55934-655-8 John 1:36–40

Are these refs sufficient for Essene article? They seem weak. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Scholarly discussion section without references

There is information without sources in this section. All of the "Scholarly" stuff without reliable "Scholarly" sources should be removed. --Hesaysis (talk) 20:30, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

BCE/CE or BC/AD, which era to use

It seems that this article is currently using a mixture of BCE/CE and BC/AD. It needs to be changed to either one usage or the other. Since this is a non-Christian subject, I believe that it should be changed to BCE/CE. If anyone has a problem with that, please reply here. After we reach consensus we will change it to which ever is decided. Editor2020 (talk) 04:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Since John the Baptist and Jesus were Essenes, BC/AD should be used. The fact that we all agree on the time is one proof that Y'shua bar Yosef was the prophesied Messiah/the Christ. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:5191:FDC8:47D5:A092 (talk) 13:34, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Garbled clause about "Essenes' library"?

"the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are commonly believed to be Essenes' library...."
I have no opinion on the validity of this; I just don't know what it's meant to say. Is it commonly believed that the scrolls, together, are the (one) library of the Essenne people? In that case maybe "the" should be inserted before "library." If it means something else, then some other change is needed, but I think it has to change somehow to be meaningful. WikiAlto (talk) 07:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Essenes in Modern Times

I propose a removal of the second paragraph of the Modern Times section, as it is neither neutral or informative. The source for these categories of modern Essene comes only from the Order of Nazorean Essenes website, and is not substantiated elsewhere. It may indeed be appropriate to mention the O.N.E. as a modern Essene-inspired syncretic movement, but unless there are further substantive sources for things like "New Age Essenes" or "Rasta Essenes" then I think they ought not to be mentioned. See the source page on the O.N.E. website, its tone is quite dismissive of other Essene revival movements (and as to the movements themselves - has there been any credible publication on them from which we can claim objective categories/groupings?) A.Aboumrad (talk) 16:16, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

monks

they sound like monks... dry life for sure ok if it's by choice but imposed by others? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.241.183.86 (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Where they Vegetarians?

Thanks. Ben-Natan (talk) 09:32, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Essenes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081227054921/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu:80/~humm/Rs/rak/courses/225/texts/ESSENES to http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Rs/rak/courses/225/texts/ESSENES
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110929134134/http://dss.collections.imj.org.il:80/community to http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/community

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

This is incredible.

"The Essenes "felt that they had been entrusted with a mission, which would turn out to be the founding of Christianity and of western civilization. They were supported in this effort by highly evolved beings who directed the brotherhood. They were true saints, Masters of wisdom, hierophants of the ancient arts of mastery. They were not limited to a single religion, but studied all of them in order to extract the great scientific principles. They considered each religion to be a different stage of a single revelation. They accorded great importance to the teachings of the ancient Chaldeans, of Zoroaster, of Hermes Trismegiste, to the secret instructions of Moses and of one of the founding Masters of their order who had transmitted techniques similar to those of Buddhism, as well as to the revelation of Enoch. They possessed a living science of all of these revelations. Thus, they knew how to communicate with angelic beings and had solved the question of the origin of evil on the earth."[3]

Some believe the Essenes had historical roots with the Greeks." When Pythagoras founded a religious movement called Pythagoreanism, the Greeks became greatly influenced by the Atlantean culture. With the establishment of his Pythagorean Italic School, the Greek culture flourished, becoming much larger than modern day Greece.Soon I will return to fight against the prince of Persia, and when I go, the prince of Greece will come. Daniel 10:20The wisdom of the Greeks soon spread into the Jewish culture that had established itself in Israel. But, in 536 BC, the Jews were conquered by the King of Persia, who lived in what is now southern Iran. So it was decided that the priest would incarnate as a Messiah, in an effort to make a more powerful impetus for change in the world.Around 500 BC, several of the masters of the priesthood incarnated in Israel and formed a community called the order of the Essenes. From within this community, a mortal man named Jeshua ben Joseph was born.It was this Hebrew child who grew into the man we know as Jesus."[4]

None of this even possible. Where has a connection be made between Essenes and Christianity by research or discovery, and Atlantean Culture, how does someone have the ....just what in the world is going on here? 2602:306:CF17:8140:2572:E30E:CF9A:AABF (talk) 23:51, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, it was a recent addition and unreliable sourced + "incredible" I removed it. Raquel Baranow (talk) 02:52, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Essenes/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Well, the book, Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls states that the seven scrolls including the book of Isaiah went to a fellow merchant who in turn sold the scrolls to Metropolitan Samuel. how did you denouce such a claim? I was just curious, because your version is much different from the one I've read. The book is edited by Hershel Shanks by the way. It would be great if you could email with your answer, i am studying to become a scholar in Wisconsin, my email is addamohara@yahoo.com. Thank you for you time

Last edited at 20:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 14:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Pretends

"which pretends (italicized for emphasis) to a severer discipline"

If you have a decent knowledge of English, all that "pretends" means here is to claim or to aspire. In no sense does it mean that there is fakery going on. Therefore there is no reason to italicize this word.

Mujokan (talk) 22:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Isa ("Jesus") is of the Essenes.

This is getting fairly well known now? "Jesus" or Isa (IS in early scripture) probably was of the Essenes, and his teaching probably better kept in James, in The Bible. And indeed it seems the Essenes are against the trinity, like Quranic teachings, and he is a prophet in The Quran. Peaceful Salutations.

Y'shua bar Yosef was his name while he was alive. Yes, the Christ was most likely an Essene. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:5191:FDC8:47D5:A092 (talk) 13:29, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

John the Baptist and Jesus were Essenes

Their righteousness and their lifestyles certainly indicate that John the Baptist and Jesus were Essenes.^{citation needed}. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:5191:FDC8:47D5:A092 (talk) 13:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC) This is latest finds of the research also, which says, "Therefore, internal evidence from the Qurʾān forces scholars to see that the Essenes, John and Jesus were all together at one point, at one time in one community". Somebody to put it in article.Rashid37009 (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Essenes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090321091436/http://jwest.wordpress.com:80/2009/03/15/rachel-elior-responds-to-her-critics/ to http://jwest.wordpress.com/2009/03/15/rachel-elior-responds-to-her-critics/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:34, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

alternative hypothesis?

To editor Laschuetz: I have reverted you twice. I explained in my edit summaries that the content you added looks like original research and your sources fail WP:RS. Per WP:BRD, you need to discuss this, not edit war. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)