Too often outsiders imagine that [[Noahite]] refers to a recent or even only a Talmudic innovation. The following article ~~traces~~ examines some of the history of the movement.

'''"God-Fearers: A Solution to the Ancient Problem of the Identity of the Sabians"''' reflects the research of Alberto Fratini and Carl Prato and contains their contributions on the Sabei and the Sabeismo.<ref>[http://www.ricerchefilosofiche.it/ God-Fearers: A Solution to the Ancient Problem of the Identity of the Sabians]</ref>

==The Hebrew Root ''SHUBH''==

For more details see [[Teshuvah]].

Actually such an opinion, to which we subscribed without reserve in our previous study, could only be half a truth. There exists in fact the Hebrew root ''SHUBH ''which is very interesting for our purposes, even if nobody – as far as we know – ever recognised any inter-linguistic relation between it and the two Arabic roots which we are dealing with. W.L. Holladay, for example, when surveying in chapter I of his ''Theroot SHUBH in the Old Testament, ''various instances of ''the root in cognate languages'', records the verb ''tawaba ''which ''occurs in classical Arabic in a great variety of meanings, some of them paralleling Hebrew usage. According to Lane’s ''Lexicon ''<ref>E.W. LANE, ''An Arabic-English Lexicon'', repr. New-York 1955, I, 1, p.361 ff. </ref>the verb in the first form has the meaning ‘he returned to a place to which he had come before’, exactly the central meaning which we shall assign to ''shùbh''; then, after having remembered two further uses of the verb in the IV form (causative) and in the X form (reflexive), he reckons among the ''less assured proposals'' a Jacob Barth’s suggestion, according to which ''the adjectives ''sobhàbh'', ''sobhèbh ''‘disloyal, faithless’, and the noun ''meshùbhà ''‘faithlessness’, are to be distinguished from the Semitic root ''twb'', and to be rather connected with the Arabic root ''s’b''=''syb'', ‘free, untrammeled’ '' <ref>J. BARTH, ''Wurzeluntersuchungen zum Hebraischen und Aramaischen Lexicon'', Leipzig 1902, p.48 f.. </ref>.

Beyond such vague elements, we know very little about the God-Fearers’ cultic practices. From Oenoanda’s text one learns that sometimes their cult had solar features, because of the Oracle’s prescription to the faithful to pray in direction of the rising sun, namely facing east, gazing up at heaven and offering prayers to the allseeing Aether <ref>See the last two lines of the Oracle (refs. above n.201). The adjective ''epòptes'', “all-seeing”, is usually attributed to Helios (cf. S. MITCHELL, ''Anatolia: Land, Men and Gods in Asia Minor'', II, Oxford 1993, p.47), even if it is also applied to ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in a dedicatory formula from an Alexandria’s inscription virtually conflating the Highest god and the Sun god, or in another one from a Pergamum altar completely associating both divinities (dedication to ''Helios Theos Hypsistos''): texts in MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, nos. 284 and 186. </ref>. A tendency to solar Monotheism comes also out from J. Ustinova’s speculations about the Iranian background of the religious position of the ''thiasoi'', the cultic associations – called ''eispoietoì adelphoì sebòmenoi theòn hypsiston'', but also ''synodos ''of ''thiaseitai ''or ''thiasòtai ''– worshipping ''Theòs Hypsistos ''in Tanais and in several other Greek colonies on the Northern shore of the Black Sea in the first half of the II c. C.E. <ref>Being collected within ''Corpus Inscriptionum Regni Bosporani ''(''CIRB''), eds. V.V. STRUVE ''et alii'', Moskow-Leningrad 1965, and firstly published by V.V. LATYSHEV in Russian, these inscriptions – as it is well-known – represent the key-stone of the old and influential study of E. SCHURER, “Die Juden im Bosporanische Reiche und die Genossenschaften der ''sebòmenoi theòn hypsiston ''ebendaselbest”, ''Sitzungberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften'', I, 1897, pp.220-5, but above all of the already quoted “Les Mystères de Sabazius et le Judaisme” of CUMONT, who pointed out to the syncretistic features of these religious communities and whose conclusions had been accepted and discussed by many scholars after him: E.R. GOODENOUGH, “The Bosporus Inscriptions to the Most High God”, ''JQR ''47 (1956-7), pp.1-44; B. LIFSHITZ, “Le Culte du Dieu Très Haut à Gorgippia”, ''RFIC ''92 (1964), pp.157-61; M. TATCHEVA HITOVA “On the Cult of Theòs Hypsistos on the Bosporus” (in Russian), ''VDI ''1 (1978), pp.133-42 (cf. ''SEG ''28 [1978], p.1648); MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, pp.133-5 (nos.83- 104), are only few examples. A good edition and translation of the texts can be found in LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting ''(Appendix 3), pp.226-46. </ref>, though we reject her general conclusions <ref>J. USTINOVA, “The Thiasoi of Theos Hypsistos in Tanais”, ''HR'', 31 (1991), pp.150-80 (cf. ''SEG ''42 [1992], p.726); Eadem, ''The Supreme Gods of the Bosporan Kingdom'', p.183 ff. (“Cult Associations on the Bosporus”). For a widespread tendency to solar Monotheism in Late Antiquity, the classical study of F. CUMONT, ''La Theologie Solaire du Paganisme Romain'', Paris 1909, is still to be considered a reference mark. For the solar character of the Harrànian popular religion, see TUBACH, ''Im Schatten des Sonnengottes'', ''passim''. </ref>. We should not dwell here on the connection established by E. Schurer more than one century ago between these groups of Monotheistic or quasi-Monotheistic believers and the ''metuentes'' attested by epigraphic and literal evidence in the Latin West <ref>''CIJ'', I, 2, nos. 5, 285, 524, 529, 642; (M. STERN, ''GLAJJ ''II, p.105, thought that ''metuens ''could be only an abridgment of the fuller formula ''deum metuens ''and hence was definitely used technically: “It is hard to conceive that either ''metuens ''or ''sebòmenos ''is used in the general sense of ‘religious’ ”). The participles ''metuens ''and ''timens ''can also be found in Christian inscriptions (E. DIEHL, ''ILCV'', Berlin 1961, nos. 3359a, 3416a, 4779, 6 [''metuens''], 1339-41, 1172 [''timens'']): in both cases, however, the formula would actually refer to God.fearers. For a Latin transcription of the Greek ''theosebès ''into Latin letters, cf. J.B. FREY, ''CIJ'', I, 2, Città del Vaticano 1936, no.228 (= D. NOY, ''JIWE'', II, no.207, Rome: Eparchia ''theosebes''; but cf. FELDMAN, “Jewish ‘Sympathizers’ in Classical Literature and Inscriptions”, p.204 n.24: “Frey, who is very eager to find ‘sympathizers’ in his inscriptions, is wrong in not recognizing a possible one here”), and ''CIJ ''I, 2, LIFSHITZ, ''Prolegomenon ''no.619a (= ''JIWE'', I, no.113, Venosa: Marcus ''teuseves''; cf. B. LIFSHITZ, “Les Juifs à Venosa”, ''RFIC'', 90 [N.S. 40] [1962], pp.367-71). For a discussion, besides ROMANIUK, “Die ‘Gottesfurchtigen’ im Neuen Testament”, ''passim'', and LAKE, “Proselytes and God-Fearers”, ''BC'', ''passim'', see LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', pp.68-70. The references to ''metuen(te)s ''are collected by SCHURER-VERMES-MILLAR-GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.168 n.74. For literary evidence, see below n.217. The term ''Theosebés ''is an equivalent of ''Sebòmenos ''(''tòn theòn''): normally in inscriptions the former is preferred because of its shorter form. </ref>, but above all with the ''sebòmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''phoboùmenoi ''(''tòn theòn''), the ''Hellenes ''whom Saint Paul regularly meets in the course of his indefatigable mission <ref>God-Fearers in ''Acts. ''Chap. x: description of a model God-Fearer, ''i.e. ''the centurion Cornelius denoted as ''eusebès kaì phoboùmenos tòn theòn ''expressing his piety by means of almsgiving and costant praying (x, 2) and enjoing a good reputation among Jews (x, 22). It is worth noting with PINES, “The Iranian Name for Christians and God-Fearers”, p.147, as “according to the Acts of the Apostles, the first Gentile converted to Christianity was one of the God-fearers”. Cornelius’ episode is the turning point of the book: from here, ''Acts'' is the history of this mission. xiii, 16 (''phoboùmenoi tòn theòn''); 43 (''sebòmenoi prosèlytoi''): the passage has been long discussed, because of its apparent self-contradiction, the words used here by Luke denoting two different classes of believers. Generally two solutions to the problem have been proposed: the first one is that ''prosèlytoi ''is a wrong word, namely an ancient gloss or “a careless expression” (KUHN-STEGEMANN, ''RE'', Suppl. IX, col.1253; KUHN, ''TWNT'', VI [1968], p.743; E. HAENCHEN, ''Die Apostelgeschichte'', in ''KritischeexegetischeKommentar uber das Neue Testament'', III, Gottingen 1959, p.355 n.5 [ET, Oxford 1971, p.413 n.5]; ROMANIUK, loc. cit., p.81; LIFSHITZ, “Du Nouveau sur les Sympathisants”, p.80; H. CONZELMANN, ''Acts of the Apostles'', Philadelphia 1987, p.106); the second coincides with the position of the scholars who reject any technical sense of the word ''sebòmenoi ''(FOAKES-JACKSON, ''BC'', V, p.88; WILCOX, “The ‘God-Fearers’ in Acts: A Reconsideration”, p.181 f.). But particularly worth of interest is a third possibility, namely the suggestion of LEVINSKAYA, ''The Book of Acts in Its 1 c. Setting'', p.47, who argues “that ''prosèlytos ''is used here in the same manner as in Mattew in a basic ‘verbal’ sense of ‘coming to any-thing new’”: she had in fact checked a semantic value of the term/verb ''prosèlytos''/''prosèrkhetai ''present in some Christian texts such as the ''Homiliae ''of ASTERIUS OF AMASEA, the ''Praescriptio ''of MARIA OF CASSOBELA, and a passage of CLEMENS OF ALEXANDRIA, where “alongside the traditional meaning there began to develop another one, namely ‘a convert to Christianity’ ”, hence the more general “idea of approaching anything new”, by which interpretation obviously all contradictions cease to exist); 50; xvi, 14; xvii, 4, 17; xvii, 17; xviii, 6-7 (''sebòmenoi ''[''tòn theòn''] and ''sebòmenoi Hèllenes'': the abridged formula ''oisebòmenoi ''could also be explained by the commandment of not naming in vain God: cf. J. KLAUSNER, ''Von Jesus zu Paulus'', Jerusalem-Amsterdam 1950, p.55; LIFSHITZ, ''ibidem''). We should add to these items three passages mentioning “Greeks” (xiv, 1, xviii, 4 and xix, 10: ''Ioudaìous kaì Hellenas''), whose identity is certainly not different from the ''sebomènon Hellènon ''previously mentioned in xvii, 4 (cf. REYNOLDSTANNEMBAUM, ''Jews and God-Fearers'', p.51). For other direct or indirect Greek literary references to God-Fearers (Epictetus, Filo, Josephus), see BERTRAM, art. “Theosebès”, ''TWNT ''III, p.123 ff.; COHEN, “Respect for Judaism by Gentiles According to Josephus”, pp.416-9 (who counts as many as five instances in ''AJ'': 3, 217; 3, 318-9; 20, 34; 20, 41; 20, 195; and four in ''BJ'': 2, 454; 2, 463; 2, 560; 7, 45); MARCUS, “The ''Sebòmenoi ''in Josephus”, pp.247-50. Talmudic references to ''yere’i ash-shamayyim ''(“Heaven Fearers”, where “Heaven” is the traditional metonymy for God) are collected and discussed by I. LEVY, “Le Proselytisme Juif”, ''REJ ''50 (1905), pp.1-9; 51 (1906), pp.29-31; and by SIEGERT, “Gottesfurchtiger”, pp.110-27; add REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.48 f. and notes; FELDMAN, “Jewish Sympathizers”, p.207 f.; and the lemma ''jàre’'', ''TWAT'', s.v</ref>in the synagogues of Asia Minor and Greece where he preaches the evangelical message (but in other meetingplaces also, mostly after Paul’s last theological break with the Jews <ref>EPIPHANIUS, ''Panarion'', 80, 1-2, compares Messalians’ places of prayer with extra-mural Jewish sanctuaries, like the cultic place outside the city walls where Paul met the God-fearing Lydia, or another one built by the Samaritans in the shape of an open-air theatre, adding that they also used buildings similar to churches: cf. below p.26.</ref>: ''Thus I shall go to Gentiles'') <ref>''Acts'', xviii, 6.</ref>, and who consequently appear to be the original bulk of the emerging Christianity according to Luke’s ''Acts''.

For the cultic features of the Western ''metuentes'', what we have observed in Juvenal’s satyrical verses <ref>Above in the text and n. 209.</ref>is perhaps enough; in reference to God-Fearers’ practices in ''Acts ''one must rather stress the crucial decision of Jerusalem’s Council (51 C.E.) <ref>For “The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem”, see K. LAKE’s ''Note XVI'', in ''BC'', I, 5, pp.195-212.</ref>, where the duties of such Gentile Converts to Christianity were fixed once and for all: ''Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: but that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood'' <ref>''Acts'', xv, 19-20. </ref>. What is that? It is just the moral-religious code which, according to rabbinical tradition, every man is obliged to follow, and in particular the stranger, the ''resident alien'' (''[[gertoshàb]] '', ''ger ash-sha’ar'') in the State of Israel <ref>For the equivalence ''ger(ei) [[toshàb ]] – ger(ei) ash-sha’ar – ben(ei) Noah, ''cf. SCHURER-VERMESMILLAR- GOODMAN, ''The History of the Jewish People'', III, 1, p.171; STRACK-BILLERBECK, ''Komm. z.NT'', II, p.722 f.; MOORE, ''Judaism'', I, p.341; REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.48 f. and 58 f. </ref>: the so-called ''Noachite Laws'' <ref>''Talmud'': ‘''Aboda Zara'', (8, 4) 64b; ''Sanhedrin'', 56a; ''Ger. ''3, 1; cf. the arts. “Laws (Noachian)”, ''JE ''VII, pp.648-50 and “Noachite Laws”, ''EJ ''XII, cols. 1190-1; see also J. BONSIRVEN, ''Le Judaisme Palestinien auTemps de Jesus-Christ'', I, Paris 1934, p.251; KLAUSNER, ''Von Jesus zu Paulus'', p.345. We reproduce the list given by REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.59, and their relative remarks: “What were the seven commandments? On the one hand, we find commandments against 1) idolatry; 2) incest; 3) murder; 4) profanation of the name of God; 5) robbery; 6) a positive commandment on the duty to form instruments of justice; 7) a ban of eating parts cut out of living animals. On the other hand we are told that the tanna’itic school of Manasseh omitted from the Noachite commandments those on the courts and on blasphemy (nos. 6 and 4 above), and substituted prohibitions of emasculation and ‘forbidden mixture’ (of plants, in ploughing, etc.)”.</ref>. There exist various versions of such prescriptions <ref>Cf. for example ''The Book of Jubilees'', 7, 20 ff., which hands down a quite different list. The set of prescriptions contained in ''Acts'', xv, 19-20 (and repeated in the next passage 28-9), however, is specially worth of attention, since it “is the only one that bears any systematic relationship to the set of religious laws which the Pentateuch makes obligatory upon resident aliens” (“Noachite Laws”, col.1190); cf. also ''Ps.Clementines'', ''PG ''II, col.221. </ref>, but it is interesting to notice now that after this historical decision Christians Converts coming from Gentilism, namely uncircumcised Christians (''Ecclesia ex Gentibus'') <ref>“The Apostolic decree, a rule agreed at the Apostolic Council where Paul, Peter and others met to discuss the extent to which the gentile converts to Christianity had to follow Jewish Law, is currently agreed by many to be a kind of Christian God-fearers’ rule” (REYNOLDS-TANNEMBAUM, op. cit., p.61, with bibliographical references at n.261); cf. SIMON, ''Verus Israel'', p.392: “Le décret apostolique, fixant comme condition à l’admission des Gentils la pratique des precepts dits noachiques, se place dans la mème ligne de la propagande juive”. </ref>, God-Fearers, at least the ''sebòmenoi/phoboùmenoi ''(''tòn theòn'')/''Hellenes ''contacted by Paul and other apostles, ''Hunafà’'', at least the ''Hanìf ''Zayd whose devotional practices are the only ones to be explicitly stated in the ''Sìra ''<ref>A fundamental correspondence between these different cathegories of people are also suggested by the English translator of the ''Sìrah'', A. GUILLAUME who, when commenting ibn Ishàq’s portrait of Zayd, pointed out that “the influence of the Jewish formula, taken over by early Christianity, is clear” (''The Life ofMuhammad'', p.99 n.2). Cf. however above, p.21 f. and ns. 188-192. </ref>, Sabians, whom many traditions consider as Noah’s heirs and consequently followers of the ''Noachite Laws'' <ref>See the authors and the works quoted by CHWOLSON, ''Die Ssabier'', II, p.563 (cf. I, p.271 and n.1), and p.592 f. (cf. GREEN, ''The City of the Moon-God'', p.13); add Khalìl ibn Ahmad who, according to al- Qurtubì, ibn Kathìr and ibn Hayyàn, states that “the Sabians believe that they belong to the religion of the prophet Noah” (quoted by GUNDUZ, ''The Knowledge of Life'', p.25).</ref>, and finally Harranians, whose capital city is said to have been founded by Noah or by some of his relatives (a son or a nephew) after the Flood <ref>For textual references to ibn al-Kalbì, Yàqùt and Bar Hebraeus, see again CHWOLSON, op. cit., II, p.553 and p.549 f. (cf. I, p.311), who, in relation to Bar Hebraeus, mentions Sem’s son Arpakshad, whereas in BUDGE’s translation of the ''Chronicon ''(cit. above n.159), p.7, one finds out the name of Noah’s nephew Shàlàh. AL-TABARI, on the other hand, in his ''History ''claims that ''Sàbì ''is another name of Lamech, the father of Noah (''Ta’rìkh al rasùl wa al-mulùk'', ed. M.J. De GOEJE, repr. Leiden 1964, I, p.178 [ET ''TheHistory of al-Tabarì'', New York 1987]: the great poligraph accepts this derivation of the name ''Sàbi’ùn ''from an eponymous hero together with the other one proposed by him in his ''Tafsìr'': see below p.30 and n.271); cf. AL-ASH’ARI, ''Tashìl al-sabìl'', Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 59 (quoted by CHWOLSON, II, p.563, cf. I, p.271). For the opinion that the Sabians claim to be followers of the religion of Noah, see AL-TUSI, ''al-Tibiyàn fì tafsìral-Qur’àn'', I, ed. Najaf 1376 H./1956, p.282 (Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 62); KASHANI, ''Minhaj al-sàdiqìn fì ilzàmal-mukhàlifìn'', III, ed. Teheran 1346 H.S./1927, p.283 (Comm. ad ''Sùra ''2, 62): cf. Mc AULIFFE, “Exegetical Identification of the Sàbi’ùn”, p.97 and p.100; add the modern Muslim lexicographers quoted by CHWOLSON, II, p.592 f. , and the authors cited in the previous note. </ref>, appear to share to some extent the same ethicalreligious duties.

But let us go on checking the available textual evidence about God-Fearers’ beliefs and rites. What Gregory of Nazianzus witnesses about the Cappadocian group called by him ''Hypsistarii ''is quite interesting, since he is speaking about his own father, converted to Christianity by some bishops ''en route ''to the Council of Nicaea (325 C.E.), thus handing down a direct and personal experience: ''The Cult was a mixture of two elements, Hellenic error and adherence to the Jewish law … Its followers reject the idols and sacrifices of the former and worship fire and lamplight; they revere the ''sabbath ''and do not touch certain foods, but have nothing to do with circumcision. To the humble they are called Hypsistarians, and the ''Pantokrator ''is the only god they worship'' <ref>GREGORIUS OF NAZIANZUS, ''Or''., 18, 5 (''PG ''35, 989D ff.). For ''Pantokrator'', see SCHURER, “Die Juden im Bosporanischen Reiche”, p.221; HORSLEY, ''New Documents'', I, p.137 and III, p.118. A cult of ''Zeus Pantokrator ''has been recently identified in Bytinia, ''I. Nicaea ''II, 1, no.1121; 2, no.1512.: the editor of these inscriptions, S. SAHIN, has rightly pointed out the relation of this cult to the worship of ''TheosHypsistos''. It must be remembered that the designation “Hypsistarii”, as well as “Hypsistiani”, was not adopted by the worshippers themselves: it was a label applied by outsiders to them (cf. MITCHELL, “The Cult of Theos Hypsistos”, p.96). </ref>.

Actually the noun ''sabà ''means ''soldiers, army, military service'' <ref>KOELER-BAUMGARTNER, ''HALAT'', II, p.934, s.v. ''sabà''.</ref>, but we guess that, if the Hebrew root ''SBA ''– both in nominal and in verbal form – has really some connections with the historical beginnings of the Sabian question, it is absolutely not because Sabianism is an astral religion or a form of heavenly idolatry, since the Harranian Sabianism itself cannot be entirely reduced to that. It is very tempting, for example, to imagine that the word had some relations with the cult(s) practised in a military environment, namely within a human milieu made up of mixed ethnical elements, by various nationalities, where the ''strangers’ '' dominant presence was the rule rather than the exception <ref>See for example, for Imperial times, J. HELGELAND, “Roman Army Religion”, or E. BIRLEY, “The Religion of the Roman Army: 1895-1977”, ''ANRW ''II, 16, 2, pp.1470-1505 and 1506-41. The figure of the “Stranger”, Salman, in Ismailian historiosophy, is a leit-motif in the works of CORBIN (see for example “Rituel Sabéen”, n.144 ff. or more particularly the monography ''Salman Pak''). </ref>. For the moment, however, without increasing what L. Massignon once felicitously called ''le roman syncrétistique des Sabéens''<ref>L. MASSIGNON, “Esquisse d’une Bibliographie Qarmate”, in ''A Volume … to E.G. Browne ''(cit. above n.32), p.333. </ref> with other fruitless speculations, it is worth paying more attention to the semantic values of the Hebrew root, considering the literary sources which allow us to see more in detail its several practical uses. Following this theme, one is given a genuine surprise: through the ''Torah'', in fact, the terms connected to this root systematically recur in relation with the particular priestly duties and privileges of Levi’s tribe. Let us read, for instance, chapter IV of ''Numbers'', verses 1-3: ''And the Lord spoke unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying: ‘Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from among the sons of Levi, after their families, by the house of their fathers, from thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, ''to do the work ''in the tabernacle of the congregation’ ''<ref>Cf. ''Samuel'', 2, 22.. </ref>.

It is not difficult to see the close semantic links between the military service and the special tasks imposed on the members of the Levite clan which can be paralleled because of the similarity that exists between the soldier’s heavy burdens and the Levite’ weighty responsibilities consisting in carrying out their sacerdotal duties in the Temple. But there is more than that. The concept of ''service'' seems in fact to recur not fortuitously through the available textual evidence about the Sabians, since we have to do with two items occupying a significant position in the already quoted Arabian manual of Magic ''Gayat al-Hakìm''. The first one is a general definition of the ''Sabians'', where it is said that they are nothing else but ''the Nabataean ''servants ''of Chaldaeans''<ref>PSEUDO-MAJRITI, ''Das Ziel des Weisens'', ed. RITTER p.80 (''… al-Sàbi’a, wa hum mamàlik al-nabtmin al-kasdàniyyìn''); GT by RITTER-PLESSNER, p.83. It is worth noting that the Harrànians are often called “Chaldaeans”, even if generally this information is handed down by the same Muslim authors asserting the usurpation of the name “Sabians” by them since al-Ma’mùn’s times: HAMZA AL-ISFAHANI, ''Tàrìkh sìnì mulùk al-‘ard wa al-‘anbiyà'', LT GOTTWALDT, p.4 (''Chaldaei occidentis tractum occupabanteorumque nepotes in urbis Carrarum atque Edessae hodieque reperiuntur'')[ed. JAWAD AL-IRANI ALTABRIZI, Berlin 1340 H., p.7: “Today (10th centurt A.D.) their descendants live in the city of Harràn and Rùhà (modern Urfa). They gave up this name (Chaldaeans) from the time of the caliph al-Ma’mùn and adopted the name ''sàbi’ùn''”]; AL-KHAWARIZMI, ''Mafàtih al-‘ulùm'', ed. Van VLOTEN, p.36 (“The Chaldaeans [''Al-kaldàniyùn''] … are they who are called ‘Sabians [and] Harrànians’. Their members live in Harràn and Iraq. They adopted the name ''sàbi’ùn ''at the time of the caliph al-Ma’mùn”); AL-NADIM, ''Fihrist'', ET DODGE, p.745 (“… ''Harnàniyah al-Kaldàniyyìn'', known as the Sabians”). ABU YUSUF, the head-judge of the Caliph Harùn al-Rashìd, states that the people of Harràn are Nabataeans and refugees from Greece (''Kitàb al-kharàj'', 5th ed. Cairo 1396 H., p.43). According to AL-MAS’UDI, ''Kitàb al-tanbìh wa al-‘ishràf'', ed. cit. (above n.150), p.31, the term “Nabataeans” refers to the Syriac-speaking people (cf. SPENCERTRIMINGHAM, ''Christianity among the Arabs'', p.146 f. and notes, for other references and details), whereas he uses the term ''Kaldàniyùn ''for denoting people who live in the marshes between Wasit and Basra in Southern Iraq, namely the group of Sabians opposed by him to the Harrànians and elsewhere denoted by him with the term ''Kimariyùn''. The relations which FARIS-GLIDDEN, “The Meaning of Koranic ''Hanìf''”, p.17 f., deduce from these traditions is worth of attention: “It is also noteworthy that the Nabataean and Koranic usage of ''hanìf ''in a favorable sense is paralleled in other Semitic languages only in the Eastern Aramaic dialect of Harràn, with which it has other linguistic affinities. Moreover the religion of the Harrànians as a Syro-Hellenistic syncretism has a good deal in common with the worship of the Nabataeans; it is also not without significance that the Aramaeans of Harràn are frequently referred to in Islamic literature as Nabataeans (Nabat), as well as Chaldaeans (Kaldànìyun). What little is known of the traditions of these people fits very well into the general picture of their culture as one sees it reflected from other sources: Nonnos’ mith of the Nabataean Lykourgos and Theodore Bar Koni’s story of the origin of ''hanpùtho ''at Athens are of the same tendentious character”. The latter story, in particular, deserves special attention, because what the texts literally recites appears at first sight quite problematic: “Il en est qui ont dit que c’est après l’olivier qui poussa à Athènes qu’ils [the ''Hanpè'']reçurent cette appellation, car olivier en langue grecque se dit ''elaià ''et paien ''halious ''(''Héllen ''?)” (THEODORE BAR KONI, ''Liber Scholiorum'', ed. ADDAI SCHER, ''CSCO'', ''Script. Syri ''26, p.285; FT by R. HESPEL - R. DRAGUET, ''CSCO'', ''Script. Syri ''188, p.213): we believe, indeed, that the only way for understanding this passage is to see in the last word not a wrong transcription of the term ''Héllen ''as the translators suggest, but a hint to the cult of Hypsistos, whose name in Hebrew is just ''Elyon ''(cf. above n.272). </ref>; in the Latin version of the work, the ''Picatrix'', the whole expression is slightly different, but the semantic bulk of ''service'' remains unwavering: ''Zabii ''= servi ''capti Chaldaerum ''<ref>''Picatrix. The Latin Version of the Ghàyat al-Hakìm'', ed. PINGREE, p.46. </ref>. The second text is relevant by itself, because it is part of the ''Gaya''’s introduction to the Sabian planetary prayers: ''And among the operations of the Sàbians is what al-Tabari the astrologer says concerning the drawing down of the power of the planets. He says: ‘That which is known to me concerning the drawing down of the planets and their services which I found attributed to the leaders of the Sabians and the servants of the temples, is what I will say. They say …’ ''<ref>PSEUDO-MAJRITI, ''Das Ziel des Weisens'', ed. RITTER, p.195; GT by RITTER-PLESSNER, p.206 (text also in DOZY-De-GOEJE, “Nouveaux Documents pour l’Etude de la Religion des Harràniens”, p.300, followed by a FT, p.341). It is tempting to think that the “leaders of the Sabians” and the “servants of the temples” eventually denote here the same class of persons, namely the Sabians in general ''tout-court''. According to several Muslim authors the Sabians had temples of different shape in honour of the seven planets (plus five else, all of circular shape, in honour of Abstract Entities such as the Primal Cause, the Reason etc.): AL-MAS’UDI, ''Murùj'', FT IV, p.61 (FT by PELLAT, II, p.535) ; AL-DIMASHQI, ''Nukhbat aldahr'', FT p.41 f.; AL-SHAHRASTANI, ''Milal'', GT p.76 f. (FT ''Les Sabéens de Shahrastànì'', by G. MONNOT, p.171 f.); cf. SEGAL, “Pagan Syriac Monuments in the Vilayet of Urfa”, p.115 ff., who believes to recognize such shrines in the archaeological remains of Sumatar Harabesi; HJARPE, ''Les Sabéens Harràniens'', pp.90-2, who usefully compares these Medieval texts. The best introduction to the subject is the more than once quoted “Rituel Sabéen”, pp.1-44, by CORBIN (repr. in Idem, ''Temple et Contemplation'', Paris 1980), who connects the idea of the heavenly temples (and of the shrines built in order to be their earthly representations) to the great spiritual Shi’ite and/or Ismailian tradition: according to these doctrines, the Sabians represent the first religious group during the present (hiero-)historical cycle to which the divine Revelation has been transmitted, followed by the Brahmans, the Zoroastrians, the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims (see once again H. CORBIN, “Epiphanie Divine et Naissance Spirituelle dans la Gnose Ismailienne”, ''ErJb ''23 (1954), p.186; Idem, ''Temps Cyclique et Gnose Ismailienne'', Paris 1982, p.110; or also MARQUET, “Sabéens et Ikhwàn al-Safà”, ''SI ''24 [1966], p.53 n.1; but see also above at n.195 the comparative table, for the relation Moon-Sabians-Revelation). Thus, it is not difficult to understand why the Sabians might be seen - as the ''Ghàya''’s passage seems to state – in terms of the Primeval Custodians/Servants of the Temple. As it is wellknown, the expression “Servants of the Most-High God” is used by Luke in ''Acts'', and precisely when the demon-possessed slave girl denotes Paul and Silas at Philippi just by means of such an attribute: the reason why Paul appears greatly troubled and irritated by this fact, so that he does not waver to exorcize the demon provoking the bitter reaction of her masters for the consequent loss of money, is explained by P.R. TREBILCO, “Paul and Silas ‘Servants of the Most High God’ (Acts, 16, 16-18)”, ''JSNT ''36 (1982), p.62, in interesting terms: “Only to a Jew or Judaizer would the title Theos Hypsistos have suggested that Yahweh was meant … Paul’s annoyance and consequent action were caused by the fact that the girl was confusing those to whom he was preaching. His anger was aroused by the fact that she was exposing his own proclamation to a syncretistic misunderstanding. He acted to remove the danger”. For the concept of “Servant”, “Slave” (Ar. ''‘abd''; Hebr. ''ebed'') in religious sense, see BIKERMAN, “The Name of Christians”, pp.119-23. </ref>. We think that the Jewish linguistic background had certainly played a very remarkable role in modelling the Arabic verb(s) ''saba’a/sabà ''and upon the name(s) ''Sabian/Sabians'' connected with them, both from the point of view of the Hebraic wisdom and from the common usage of language, as we have learnt dealing with the root ''SHUBH ''and with some technical figures of the Hebraic culture like the ''[[gertoshàb]]'', as well as with some proper names such as ''Elizabeth <ref>D. KELLERMANN, art. “''Gur, ger ''etc.”, ''TWAT'', I, p.989 f. Talmudic references also in REYNOLDSTANNENBAUM, ''Jews and God-Fearers at Aphrodisia'', p.48 and ns.168 and 171. </ref>. ''From a strictly etymological point of view, however, we are convinced that, if all these linguistic elements are fully pertinent, they must be considered at the same time in terms of progressive semantic intersections, issuing with an ever-increasing meaningfulness from the original noun which we believe does not come from Hebrew.

At this point, we have become familiar with a wide semantic field, the general co-ordinates of which are expressed by terms and concepts such as ''People(s), Nation(s), Greek(s), Soldier(s), Stranger(s), Servant(s), etc.''. Is there any coherence in that? We think so, mostly after having acknowledged the historical relationships between the particular roles played by these groups of people in reference to the prevailing religion according to the double-faced perspective according to which such a phenomenon was viewed in Late Antiquity, also beyond the frontier of the Roman Empire.

The strength of the idea of identifying the Sabians with the God-Fearers, namely the worshippers of One Most-High God, lies in the exceptional correspondence of the latter group not only with the three Koranic paragraphs mentioning ''Sàbi’ùn'', but also with most of the Arab-Islamic sources of the Middle Ages, in spite of the often hazy, loose, or even contradictory nature of such information. As far as the ''Koran''’s passages are concerned, we believe that the chains Muslims-Jews-Christians-Sabians (''Sura ''II), Muslims, Jews, Sabians Christians (''Sura ''V) and Muslims-Jews-SabiansChristians- Magians-Unbelievers (''Sura ''XXII) should be understood in terms of a sketch-map of the Universal Religions, though not chronologically listed, in some way similar to the one contained in Aristide’s ''Apology ''or to the other one shown by the famous ''Kartìr''’s Mid-Persian ''Inscription'': consequently, we find it '''impossible that the place of the Sabian group within the Muslims’ Holy Book might be occupied by a simple sect such as Mandaeans''', even if the last important work recently published on the subject by S. Gunduz goes on presenting this old theory once again. But an even more important reason why '''only God-Fearers appear perfectly able to take upon themselves the problematic identity of this (Sabi) community''' is that no other one possesses the singular features drawn by the definition of the Sabians often recurring in many literary sources, namely that they are ''a religious group which has no cult, scripture and prophet, admitting only the ''tawhìd'', the profession of faith: ‘There is no god but God’''. A religion with similar features is a kind of a paradox, but God-Fearers prove that the contrary is true: the available evidence about their beliefs and ritual practices, in fact, is quite meagre, as well as that about their gathering places, so that on the whole one can just state that they shared the universal code of moral-religious duties generally known by the label of ''[[Noachite laws]]''.

'''We should remember that ''[[Noah’s ~~Laws’~~Laws]]'' were also the limited set of observances foreseen by the Jerusalem Council (51 C.E.) for uncircumcised Christians (''Ecclesia ex Gentibus'')'''. Together with other common religious features shared by both groups, this factor may explain why the first Latin translation of the ''Koran'', fully corroborating our theory, seems not to distinguish completely between Christians and God-Fearers; the same things happened – as Pines demonstrated - in the regions where different Iranian languages were spoken, since the name for Christians in Persia is still today just ''Tarsakàn'', ''Fearers'': this historical confusion may suggest that the ''Sabians'' mentioned by Muhammad might perhaps be nothing else but an alternative name for ''Christians''.

Our theoretical proposal is in accordance, besides, with another important traditional opinion about the Sabians, that they are a ''people who leave their religion (for another)''. Such an idea comes apparently from the Arabic root(s) ''SB’/SBW'', but we have checked the Hebrew root ''SHWBH ''which it seems likely had a very significant influence upon the Arabic one(s). Al-Bìrùnì’s statement that the Sabians are ''the adherents of the prevailing religion'' is closely connected with this line of thought, even if it seems not to derive from lexicographic sources. Needless to say, the last definition just like the previous ones cannot seriously be applied to any existing religion, nor to a religious phenomenon such as Conversion. Surely one of the factors which played a crucial role in this sense, also from a linguistic point of view, was the existence of an original group such as the God-Fearers, who are not adequately defined by a name like ''Converts'', but rather by that of ''Mid-Converts'', or even better by one of the above recorded periphrastic expressions.

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:59) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:59) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:59) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/extensions/MobileFrontend/includes/diff/InlineDiffFormatter.php:59) in /home/bpilant613/public_html/w/includes/WebResponse.php on line 42
Changes - Wikinoah English