FOOD FOR THOUGHT: "Educate yourself by asking the right questions, and seeking the right answers."
	YOU ARE IN DARKNESS.
moses page 1 moses page 2 moses page 3

Having fulfilled his task, Moses nominated Joshua as his successor. He now could take leave of this world. He was not allowed to set foot himself on he soil of the Promised Land. But he was allowed to glimpse it from afar, from Mount Nebo. The view from Nebo into Palestine was the last thing that Moses saw. God ordered Moses "Go thee unto Mount Nebo and die, but thou shalt not go unto the land which I give to the children of Israel." The supposition is that Moses had died somewhere to the east of Jericho. But it is thought that this story in the Old Testament is not true geographically. Those searching for the grave of Moses at the place mentioned in the Old Testament were not successful and claimed that the five locations mentioned had dissappeared in the 3000 years since then. Let Spenta Mainyu introduce another problem: These five geographical locations exist in Kashmir, between India and Pakistan. The Old Testament names five places in relation to Moses' burial site (Deuteronomy 34:1-7): the Plains of Moab; Mount Nebo (Abarim mountains); the peak of (mount) Pisgah; Beth-peor and Heshbon. The 'Promised Land' beyond the Jordan had been reserved for the children of Israel and not for all Hebrews (Numbers 27:12). Where was this 'Promised Land'? Could these locations be established geographically? Well, the small town of Bandipur - 70 kilometers north of Srinagar - where the valley of the river Jhelum to the plain of Lake Wular was called Behat-poor, Bethpor or Vethpor (Beth-peor). About 20 kilometers north-east of Bandipur lies a small village of Hasba or Hasbal (this must be the Biblical Heshbon - mentioned in Deuteronomy 4:46) which is mentioned in connection with Beth-peor and Pisgah. The Plains of Mowu correspond to the Plains of Moab, which lies some 5 kilometers north-west of Mount Nebo, which must be the Baal Nebu or Niltoop. This place offers a splendid view of Bandipur and the entire highlands of Kashmir. About 12 kilometers from Bandipur there is a village called Aham-Sharif. From Aham-Sharif about an hour away is the little village called Buth at the foot of Mount Nebo. There in a cabin-like shrine, in between two deodar trees, is the tomb of Moses, which is called the 'tomb of Hazrat Mosa', and also the 'Tomb of the Prophet of The Book.' In the very early histories of Kashmir it was written that Moses had gone there and died. There are other places there called 'Muqam-i Musa' (the 'place of Moses'); in Bijbihara, south of Srinagar a place on the river bank is still referred to as 'Moses' bath-place', where there is a magic stone called 'Sang-i-Musa' ('Stone of Moses'); the rocks at the confluence of the rivers Jhelum and and Sind are called 'Kohna-i-Musa'('Cornerstone of Moses'). This is unbelievable! Could you comprehend a proposition that this myth of Moses originated from India? A myth composed of motifs from India, Canaan, Palestine, and Egypt? But the locations seem to be there. The missing grave of Moses is there.

According to Sigmund Freud's hypotesis, in the history of the Jewish belief system, following the giving up of the Mosaic religion, there was a long period where no traces of the concept of monotheism; the ban on ceremonies; and the accent on morality could be seen. In Kadesh-Meribah two groups of the Jewish people came together. They were in the process of adopting a new belief system. The memories relating to Exodus and to the 'Moses' figure was so strong and fresh among the people who came from Egypt that they insisted on these memories included in the section on the old ages. Whereas the other group, the people who were in the Land of Midian, had the decisive aim of exalting the new God - YHWH - and rejecting his foreignness. The only mutual thing between these groups was their tendency to accept that they each had a religion previously and to reject the contents of these belief systems. This might have been the first point written down. We might not be far off if we assumed that those coming from Egypt brought with them their written records and their resolve to re-write the history. At this point they did not hesitate even for a moment to re-shape their records in line with the necessities and purposes of the day, as if they did not know that something called distortion has existed. As a consequence a discrepancy occurred between the written history and its oral narrative, the oral tradition. Though the oral narrative was an addition to the historical records there was an inconsistency in between. In comparison with the recorded history the oral narration was effected to a lesser extent by the distortion, and on certain points it was immune to it. Which meant that it may have been closer to the truth than the written statements. But it was neither very stable nor precise, and furthermore it was changed so much as it passed down the generations that its reliability has suffered. But we can say that, despite the deliberate denials by the official historians, genuine ideas and truths were never lost. The information on these continued to exist in the oral tradition among the people. We can say that the same applies to other things which ceased to exist in appeareance, concurrently with Moses (those aspects of the Mosaic belief system which were unacceptable for the majority of its contemporaries). This oral tradition did not lose strength in hundreds of years, on the contrary, gained weight in the official announcements and reached a level where it could have a decisive effect on the thoughts and actions of people.

Read the text of the Old Testament carefully, then try as much as you can to follow the development of the Judaic belief system, and compare what it was and what it is. You would almost certainly end up with the conclusion that the Hebrews have given up the the original belief system, the Aten/Aton belief system brought over from Egypt by Moses, and started worshipping another God which is almost identical with the 'Baalim' (Baals - the local Gods) of the neighboring peoples. None of the deliberate and conscious attempts were able to conceal this reality. Mosaic belief system did not vanish without trace. A possible trace, a vague and distorted 'oral tradition' managed to survive. This word of mouth worked beneath the surface, increased its influence. But did it succeed in resurrecting the original Mosaic bleief system? Your guess is as good as mine! But I suggest you study pro-exilic and post-exilic texts. Pay a special attention to the fact that there are two Talmuds. Talmud Yerushalmi (Palestinian Talmud) and Talmud Babli (Babylonian Talmud). The Palestinian Talmud is written in western Aramaic and full of many Greek and Latin terms and expressions whereas the post-exilic Babylonian Talmud, written in eastern Aramaic is sprinkled with Persian words. This Talmud, the Babylonian one is the most authoritive and usually called the Talmud. Try to find the differences in between the two, and you will end up with the progress of the Judaic belief system in time. Do not forget the role played by Ezra in the post-exilic period for the Judaic belief system. You may find more if you go on searching,

The Rabbinic Version of what is written here, tries to protect the continuity between the distant past when Moses was around and our times; and to reject the deep rift between the Moses' lawgiving - which is the most significant phenomenon in the history of Jewish religion - and the Jewish belief system of the following ages. This deep rift was bridged by the worship of YHWH in the beginning and closed slowly in time. Numerous clues show beyond doubt that this flow of events is historically correct. But the Rabbinic Version tries to reject this flow with all kinds of means. Here the Rabbinic Version attempts something similar to the deliberate distortion which transformed YHWH into the God of the Patriarchs. When we take into account this conscious drive behind the Rabbinic Version we cannot help but believe that Moses was the person who gave the idea of monotheism to the Hebrews (Jews). The fact that, we are able to 'see' from where Moses got this idea, which the rabbis are not able to know anymore, makes our acceptance of it much easier. We cannot help but believe also that the idea of monotheism, the rejection of witchcraft and ceremonies, and the emphasis on the moral obligations stipulated on the name of God were actually the Moses Doctrine itself.

The story about the Patriarchs has served another purpose. They lived in the land of Canaan supposedly. They identified themselves with various places there. It is perfectly acceptable that they may have been the heroes of the Land of Canaan, or local supreme entities, who were adopted by the nomadic Israelites for the sake of their early history. It is a matter for them to cortemplate. But the Israelites seem to resort to this story of Patriarchs to claim that they were the natives of the land, and to defend themselves in the face of hatred directed at a foreign conqueror. Their claim that the God YHWH is returning to them what their Patriarchs once owned is a very clever maneuver. In the later editions to the Old Testament, they have refrained from mentioning Kadesh. Instead, the place where the religion was founded is given as the 'Mountain of God,' Sinai-Horeb. What was the reason behind this? It is hard to tell. People may have tried not to remember the influence of Midian. But all of the later distortions, especially those during the period of Rabbinic Law, had another purpose. There was no need to change the events in line with the desired purpose, because that was done already long ago. But care was taken to link the orders and institutions of the day on the past, on the laws of Mosaic religion, as a rule, thus providing them with sanctitiy and making them binding. In the 800-900 years between the Exodus and the writing of the final text of the Old Testament by Ezra and Nehemiah the degree of conformity between the religion of YHWH and the original Mosaic belief system has changed. The beginning and the end is not consistent anymore. This is the basic outcome and the weighty essence of the history of the Jewish religion.

Now let us check what we have: There is no mention of the God of the 'people of Exodus'. There were more than one name used for the 'Sole God'(!). Then came a restriction on the free usage of the name of the God (prohibitions on the free usage of the names of the supreme beings were seen since pre-history). YHWH-Jehovah of the Midianite tribe became the God of all the tribes. The solution seems simple: The new religion is a compromise between the people coming out of Egypt and those living in the land of Midian. The only name of the God permitted for free usage is Jehovah (YHWH) which is the volcano God of the Midianites. The sign of this new religion is the circumcision, which has its origins in Egypt. With this solution, the 'people of Exodus' are put in a position where they supposedly thought that their freedom was the result of an intervention by this 'Sole God' - Jehovah (YHWH). But It was not Jehovah (YHWH) but Moses who brought them out of Egypt. By making Jehovah the 'force' behind this successful coming out of Egypt, the Exodus and the new God Jehovah are brought together (YHWH - Jehovah, by inference in the Old Testament, is also the God of Abraham).This makes possible the deletion of the period in between. The place and the 'event' where and when Moses received the Ten Commandments is moved from Kadesh-Meribah to the Mount Sinai/Tur'u Sina/El Tur/Jebel Musa in the Sinai peninsula. The person who brought people out of Egypt, Moses, is moved to Kadesh or Sinai-Horeb and replaced the Midianite priest. In return the volcano God Jehovah (YHWH - living on a mountain in Midian) has extended its influence to Egypt. This is balanced with the extension of Moses' influence to cover the region which includes Kadesh and the land to the south of Jordan/Yordan. This way Moses the Egyptian is fused with the founder of the later religion, Moses the Midianite (the son-in-law of Jethro/Yetro or Reuel or Hobab the Midianite), and gave his name to him. And those wise people out there don't forget the Indian dimension..

In the fight between the Israel and Amalekites at Rephidim (Now Wadi Feiran) Joshua won a decisive victory for Israel. And in this emergency Moses is said to have taken his rod and produced water by striking a rock or inserting the rod in the rock. The Old Testament may be right in the facts of nature here, because the limestone rocks in that area hold water and when the surface is broken away water gushes out. This is a fact, the rest is most probably a creation on the part of the writers of the Old Testament.. According to the 'Book' Moses used his rod once again on the journey from Kadesh-Meribah (Palestine) to Edom. This Moses must be 'Moses the Midianite' who had obviously known this highly unusual method of finding water because he was familiar with this natural phenomenon in the region, being a Midianite. But as the 'Book' poses it Moses could be said to have learnt this method during his exile among Midianites (this is the Moses the Egyptian when he fled to the Midian). The Moses of the 'Book' must be the Egyptian Moses, because if you remember the compromise at Kadesh-Meribah implanted Moses the Egyptian into the 'event,' though it was impossible for this Moses to be physically present there.

St. Helena the mother of Constantine the first Christian Emperor founded a tower of refuge erected at the foot of the mountain of Moses (Mount Sinai), where Moses according to the Old Testament, encountered the 'burning bush.' One of the points to note is that the 'being' present in the 'burning bush' on the Mount Sinai is given as an angel at first and as the God later on. It is not clear whether the utterances are from the angel or the God. Scholars studying this story reached the conclusion that there was a bush on the Mount Sinai which was accepted by the local people as the abode of the mountain God (YHWH). Deuteronomy 33:16 is quoted as a support: 'And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the goodwill of him that dwelt in the bush..' But this approach does not have a universal acceptance. 'This mountain God did not reside in the bush but in the fire' some said. This mountain God 'descends' on the mountain in fire, smoke, and rumbling and shaking in the ground. does it not? In order to 'descend' he must be living somehere 'up there,' in the sky - which mankind thought a 'chosen' and fitting place for the 'supreme beings.' Let Spenta Mainyu refresh your memory: According to the 'Book' this bush 'burned with fire' and yet 'was not consumed.' This phenomenon and the plant, according to some researchers, could be explained as a variety of gas-plant Fraxinella, the Dietamnus Albus L., which has a strong growth about 3 feet in height with clusters of purple blossom. The whole bush is covered with tiny oil glands. This oil is so volatile that it is constantly escapes and if approached with a naked light bursts suddenly into flames. Some other researchers put forward the theory that the flames may have been the crimson blossoms of mistletoe twigs (Loranthus Acaciae) which grow on various prickly acacia bushes and trees throughout the Holy Land and Sinai. When this mistletoe is in full bloom the bush becomes a mass of brilliant flaming colour and when viewed from afar, looks as if it is on fire. Spenta Mainyu had the chance to see these trees and this scenery exactly as described: 'Bush burned with fire.' Exodus 19:2 tells us that when the Children of Israel departed from Rephidim, they came to the Sinai desert, pitched in the wilderness, and Israel camped before the Mount (of Moses) and Moses went up unto God.. (They must have walked quite a long distance..Hundreds of kilometers in fact!) Then in Exodus 20:2-3 this God declares clearly 'I am the Lord your God (...) You shall have no other Gods before me.'

We could never find out if Moses had accepted a foreign God. What is clear, as far as the Old Testament's account shows us, is that YHWH, of Moses, was not a God for all the mankind. YHWH had chosen one, and a very small, group of people. All the other groups of people were YHWH's enemies. One of the assumptions put forth is that this YHWH was the God 'Yau' or 'Yaw' mentioned in the tablets of Ugarit (Ras-Shamra). YHWH was a celestial God like 'Yau' or 'Yaw' and later on came to be accepted as the creator of the earth and sky. In the beginning the creation myth was different: EL (God) or ELOHIM (Gods) were supposed to have defeated a mythical beast of chaos (Lotan, Leviathan, Rahab) and only then were able to create the earth and skies. Later on this story was changed and the creation was accepted to have started by an utterance by the God (He just said 'be'!). MARDUK, the national God of Babylon also defeated the beast Tiamat first, and then created the earth. MARDUK and EL were considered as 'one' most of the time. Mosaic belief system did not have a 'devil' in the beginning. Good and evil were caused by the God. Later on, to remove this discrepancy the belief was born: Devil existed always. The reason for Adam's expulsion from paradise is presented at first as the serpent which tempted Eve. Later on this was turned into devil appearing in the form of a serpent. Then came the Satan with the Book of Job (Job 1:6): 'Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.' There is no 'Satan' in the previous chapters of the Old Testament.

According to many scholars, the one who has given the final shape to the Mosaic belief system was Yetro/Jethro. The following quote from the Old Testament is given as an evidence to this claim: Exodus 18:12: '..And Jethro, Moses' father in law, took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God: and Aaron came and all the elders of Israel, to eat bread with Moses' father-in-law before God.' Here we read for the first time, Israel make an offering to the God with a ceremony (hadn't Moses ban all the offerings and ceremonies because they were witchcraft?). The Old Testament is not a reliable source but again we must point out that this event is worth noting. Much more important is that, in the original version of the Old Testament, it is written that Jethro is bringing offerings for the 'Elohim' and not for the God ('-im ' in Hebrew makes the word plural. Therefore Yetro is bringing offerings for the 'Elohs' - 'Gods.').

Whether or not Moses had existed is not a matter for us to decide. If we go by what is written in the Old Testament there was a 'man called Moses.' He performed 'miracles' which were mostly based on older tradtions. Spenta Mainyu refers you to the legend of the ancient God Bacchus (who is originally Arab - therefore not far away from the region where Moses lived and operated), who was rescued from water, who crossed the Red Sea on foot, who inscribed laws on stone tablets, whose armies were led by columns of fire, and from whose forehead shone rays of light. Now, what do you think?

This is not all! The Indian epic Ramayana tells of the hero Rama. He led his people on a journey through the heart of Asia finally to reach India more than 5000 years ago (more than 3500 years before Moses). Rama was a lawgiver. He had extraordinary powers. He caused springs gush forth in the deserts through which he led his people (like the story told in Exodus 17:6). He provided the people with a kind of Manna to eat (like the story in Exodus 16:3-35). He suppressed a virulent plague with the sacred drink soma, India's 'water of life.' Finally he conquered the 'promised land', Sri Lanka, after invoking a hail of fire to fall on its king. In order to reach Sri Lanka, he crossed the sea via a land bridge, apparently exposed by the low tide at a place still known as the Bridge of Rama.

We are not finished yet. Zarathustra (Zoroaster) also had a sacred fire that he could put into use as he wished, like Moses. According to Greek writers Eudoxus, Aristotle and Hermodoros of Syracuse, Zarathustra was of royal blood like Moses; was taken from his mother; was left exposed to the wild. He became the prophet of a new religion when he was 30. God, appeared to Zarathustra, heralded by thunder, robed in light, seated on a throne of fire on the holy mountain Albordj, encircled by flames. There God bestowed on him his sacred Law. Finally Zarathustra wandered with his followers to a remote 'promised land.' He came to the shores of a sea where, with God's intervention, the waters parted so that his (God's) chosen people could cross the sea on foot.

Moses made use of a peculiar mixture of pure doctrine and curious magical practices - a mix apparently filled with Vedic incantations as elements of Egyptian religious ritual. His intention was after all to proclaim the existence of One God, the God of Israel, beside whom no other Gods were to be worshipped. He was obliged to resort to 'wonders' to lend weight to God's will - as it coincided with his own of course. The Church rejected the Greek and Roman mythology as the religious roots of Christian belief, but the accounts of Moses have been accepted as a whole. Whoever opposed Moses was destroyed. Fire was the method used for such eliminations and was frequently used to demonstrate power - for Moses seems often to have resorted to illustrating his point in a rather incendiary manner. We are told that he had a great variety of magic tricks at his disposal (Exodus 7:8-13). Apocryphal writings of magical content were composed to complement the Pentateuch, associating themselves with the authority of Moses.

Egyptian priests were able to make gunpowder and use it in fireworks or primitive flares as early as six thousand years ago. Moses, we are told by Professor Flinders Petrie, had authority over the sulphur mine at Gnefru, which was in existence since the 5th millennium BC. Therefore Moses knew about the production of the gunpowder. When his subjects refused to heed his words, ignored his warnings, or stood against him (Exodus 18:14) he could have called forth a 'devouring fire' that was guaranteed to have the desired effect. There was fire on Mount Sinai (Ex. 19:1-25); there was fire when Korah and his clan rebelled against Moses (Numbers 16:1-35); there was fire when Aaron's sons were experimenting with it in the Tabernacle (Leviticus 10:1-7); there was fire even for Moses himself where he may have suffered such severe burns in an explosion (A volcanic eruption Mount Sinai as he was receiving(!) the divine commandments?) that he had to wear a head-bandage or a veil (Exodus 34:29-35).

You all know the the story about the so called 'Miracle of the Sea' along the road to Palestine. We are told that 'a detachment of Egyptian chariots, which was attempting to recapture the Israelites, was swallowed up by the sea, the horses and riders were drowned.' In addition to various opinions as to whether this event has taken place, there is another dispute about the scene of the event. Getting a clear picture on this issue is even much more difficult. First of all there is the difficulty brought about by the translation. The Hebrew words 'Yam Suph' are at the center of this dilemma. These words are sometimes translated as the 'Red Sea' and at other times as the 'Reed Sea.' Modern translations recognize Yam Suph as meaning the 'Reed Sea' or 'Papyrus Marsh.' Moffats's translation of The Old Testament is as follows: ' For we have heard how the Eternal (God) dried up the water of the Reed Sea before you when you left Egypt' (Joshua 2:10). Up to Jeremiah in the Old Testament it is called the Reed Sea. Whereas the New Testament speaks only of the Red Sea (Acts 7:36; Hebrews 11:29). On the shores of the Red Sea there are no reeds, and the Reed Sea proper lay farther north.

The building of the Suez Canal has altered the appearance of the landscape to an extraordinary degree. According to the calculations, the 'miracle of the sea' must have taken place in that area. What was once Lake Balah there disappeared when the canal was constructed and became a marshland. At the time of Rameses II the Gulf of Suez was connected to Bitter Lakes. This connection may have extended up to Lake Timsah (Lake of Crocodiles). Where at one time a Sea of Reeds existed. The crossing may have taken place near the town of Es-Suwez (present day Suez). Occasionally strong north-west winds drive the water at the northern extremity of the Gulf back so far that it is possible to wade across. In Egypt the prevailing wind is from the west. The east wind mentioned in the Old Testament is on the other hand typical of Palestine. '..Expeditions set off from the harbour of Egeon-Gober (Ezjon Geber) near Elath on the shores of the Sea of Reeds in the land of the Edomites, a people already conquered by David because of the caravan route to the Red Sea, and under Solomon, dependent on Israel' (The Original Jesus, p.43-44, Elmar R. Gruber and Holger Kersten, Great Britain, 1995)

Here we must remember the story that 'Moses the Egyptian' being a follower of the Aten religion chose a people (Hebrews) as his own, imposed on them the Aten religion - which was toppled by the people of Egypt - and led his people out of Egypt. This story and the story of God designating the Sons of Israel as his people and leading them to Palestine, to the 'Promised Land,' has undeniable similarities. In fact, they are identical! Therefore during the thousands of years in between the origin of the story and what we read about it today, could the 'creative' mind of the mankind (scribes-rabbis in our case) have distorted this story and merged this image of Moses and the YHWH of the Judaic belief system, transferring the characteristics of Moses to this God as 'attributes'? I can almost hear those of you branding me with heresy and blasphemy. But that does not make the question or the dilemma disappear. Think! Ask the right questions, so that you may have a chance to see through this smoke-screen erected between you and the truth.

Jewish religion is not founded by a single person, based on a single revelation coming down from 'up there' to a single 'messenger' down on earth. Mosaic belief system is the sum total of a long evolution. The Jewish believers has progressed from a multitude of gods (Polytheism), to accepting other Gods but believing that they have a God peculiar to their nation (Henotheism), and from there to the belief that there is only one God with no other for all creation (Monotheism). The Sons of Israel believed in their nomadic period that their God YHWH traveled with them, insisted that Israel should not worship other Gods; should not make offerings to these gods; should not marry with the believers of other Gods. Wars that Sons of Israel fought then were to a certain extent wars fought between their God and the Gods of their neighbors. Israel survived the Assyrian assault due to a plague which broke the Assyrian army. But the Babylonians took Jerusalem and exiled the Children of Israel to Babylon. The religious leaders of the Chlidren of Israel were not in a position to carry on with the belief that the God were their's only, and had made a covenant with them, etc. Then they changed their minds that this God was not their's only, and all that they have gone through were caused by YHWH, but yet they were the most loyal and loved children of YHWH. The Old Testament was finalized at this point. All the poems, historical events, mythological stories, laws etc., that came down to them 'orally' were gathered, collected, and written down. Of course some of them were changed completely in this process. There is not a single written document coming down to us from Moses, or from the periods of Solomon (Shlomo) and David who lived later. The 'law' which is called the 'Mosaic Law' is repeated in three separate places in the Old Testament (Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy), with slight differences each time. Why? Is it because of those different writers? There is human sacrifice in the original version of the Mosaic Law. The firstborn child was sacrificied to YHWH (like it was done elsewhere in Canaan with sacrifices to Molek). Israel's God was not different from the other Gods of Semites as yet. Sacrificies were made at the altar, some pieces of it were burned and the blood was spilled on the fire, because according to the Old Testament, blood is the life of an animal and its meat should not be consumed with its blood. Following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by Emperor Titus, the tradition of burnt offerings were given up by the decision of the Jewish priests, because offerings has to be made at the Temple only. We can safely say that the Jewish belief system was not different from or superior to the other regional belief systems of the day. There was no mention of an 'unseen God' at first. As we saw earlier in other examples, Israel's God shows himself to mankind, and sometimes descends from 'heavens' and speaks with humans. So Israel's God was another one of those early age supreme beings like Marduk, Baal, Osiris and a multitude of others. The only difference is that the making of its images were banned. Jewish history is known for its 'pairs:' Two groups of people came together and created a nation. These two groups separated and established two different kingdoms. There are two different names for the God in the sources of the Old Testament. There were two belief systems - one is brought from Egypt by Moses, and the other is the Midianite belief system belonging to the second group of people. Lastly, there were two founders of these two belief systems, both called 'Moses,' the characters of whom should be differentiated.

Levites sided with Moses at Kadesh when the accord was reached, because they served him, and his memory was still fresh. In the following centuries they blended with the people and priests. One of the functions of these priests was to protect the sacred texts. While they were protecting these texts they made amendments in line with their aims of course. But there were people remembering and jealously defending what they were told to do. They were told that all kinds of offerings and ceremonies were witchcraft and prohibited. These people, the 'messengers,' tried to teach relentlessly the Mosaic doctrine, which preached that God wanted only a righteous and just (ma'at) life, based on the revelation of the 'Sole God', and condemned the offerings and ceremonies. These attempts by the 'messengers' managed to achieve a permanent success, and the doctrines which they employed to re-strengthen the old faith, became the unchanging content of the Jewish belief system.

Moses has revived three traditions: The name of God, the Pesach/Passah festival, and the Sabbath. All these traditions were aimed at creating a nation. God was the pivot. Which was the God of the Patriarchs, the 'Sole God', who has chosen Israel as his people, and made a covenant with hem. Pesach/Passah was not related to the Exodus originally. It was a festival of earlier origins but it was merged with Exodus and the practice of not consuming leavened bread, (God gave them manna to eat in the desert). This story was made into a festival and the old Pesach/Passah festival was mounted to the story again to create a central figure of God working for his people, and to create a common process which was shared by the people. Of course the Sabbath, which is a ban again for all the people. Three central and 'national' factors in the creation of a nation.

Kenites are a clan closely related to the Midianites and Amelekites, frequently mentioned in the Old Testament narratives about the early history of the Israel. The name means 'belonging to the copper-smiths' ('qain' in Arabic and 'qainâya' in Aramaic mean = a smith), but also thought to have been derived from Cain, whose descendants they were believed to be (Genesis 4). It is probable that Kenites were a pariah people who eked out a livelihood as shepherds and travelling tinkers. Judges 1:16 identifies the father-in-law of Moses not as a Midianite but as a Kenite (Exodus 2:11-22; 3:1). Jethro (Reuel, Hobab) subsequently established peaceful relationships with Israelites, and suggested a legal organization which Moses accepted (Exodus 18). Kenites accompanied the Israelites in the desert (Numbers 10:29-32), but refused to join them in the occupation of Palestine. The God of Israel YHWH was suggested to have been the Kenite tribal deity. It is possible that the narrative about Cain in Genesis 4 indicates a traditon that the Kenites were under the protection of YHWH, though not under Israelite religious law. Kenites seem to be almost part of Judah by the time of David (1 Samuel 27:10; 30:29).

Now, as Spenta Mainyu promised earlier let us see the apocrypha: What is it? What does the term mean? It is the plural of the Greek word 'apocryphon' ('hidden away', 'secret', 'obscure'). Apocrypha is used to designate certain religious books highly regarded by the Jews of ancient times but never included in the Hebrew canon of Scripture. In the narrowest sense it refers to a section in the King James version of the Bible (and other versions related to it) that contains those books found in the Greek and Latin translations of the Old Testament but which are not included in the original Hebrew. In a broader sense it is used to cover certain other noncannonical writings from the Hebrew antiquity, such as those more commonly called pseudoepigrapha (books 'written under a false name') most of them of an apocalyptic character. The origin of the term apocrypha is still a matter of dispute but the most probable view derives it from the legend preserved in II Esdras. IV Esdras of the Vulgate which relates that when Ezra was commissioned to republish the Law in the days following the Babylonian exile he was told that Moses on Mount Sinai had been instructed to 'hide' many of the words he received (verse 6) and that he himself was to issue publicly only a portion of the books that were dictated to him, the others to be delivered 'in secret to the wise' (Verses 26,46). This tradition of 'a store of books deliberately 'hidden away' from public use led to the rise of an imprecise use of word apocrypha to denote any books outside the familiar canon. The word was introduced into Christian usage as a convenient name for those books they found in the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint) but not in the Hebrew. The standard Apocrypha are: I Esdras, II Esdras, Book of Tobit, Book of Judith, Book of Esther, Book of Wisdom (Wisdom of Solomon), Ecclesiasticus (The Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach), Book of Baruch (Epistle of Jeremy), Book of Daniel, the Prayer of Manasses, Book of Maccabees. (EncBrit V2;118b). There are pseudepigrapha and apocryphal works from Qumran as well, which could also be mentioned under this title.

The two primary modes of expression in the 'Fertile Crescent', namely hieroglyphics and cuneiform were already quite ancient when a third fundamental way of expressing thoughts was born in the 2nd millennium BC. - namely the Alphabet. Possibly stimulated by the picture language of their Egyptian comrades, the Semitic workmen in Sinai devised their own peculiar and quite different type of script. The famous Sinai inscriptions are the first stage of the North Semitic alphabet, which is the direct ancestor of our own alphabet. It was used in Palestine, in Canaan, and in the Phoenician republics on the coast. About the end of the 9th cent.BC. the Greeks adopted it. From Greece it spread to Rome and from there went round the globe. The sentence '...and the Lord said unto Moses: Write this for a memorial in a book..' in Exodus 17 is very important because for the first time the word 'write ' is mentioned in the Old Testament. The deciphering of the Sinai tablets shows of this Old Testament passage in a completely new light as a historical statement. Because we now know that 300 years before Exodus, men from Canaan had already been 'writing' in this area, in a language which was closely related to that of Israel.

 This is the story of Moses.