The En-soph originally manifested itself by putting forth a first principle, the prototype of creation, or Macrocosm, which is termed the Son of God, or the primitive man, Adam Kadmon. This is the human figure which in the vision of Ezekiel soars above the animals (i. 26, 27). From Adam Kadmon emanated the creation in four degrees or worlds, the first of which represents the operating qualities of Adam Kadmon, that is, powers or intelligences proceeding from him, and forming at once his essential qualities and the instruments with which he works. These qualities are in number ten, and form the Sephiroth, composed of two sacred numbers-three and seven. The three first Sephiroth are intellectual, the seven others are only attributes. This is the order in which they emanate one from the other:

8

10

Their names are, I. Kether, crown; II, Hocmah, wisdom; III. Binah, intelligence; IV. Hesed, grace; V. Gevourah, strength; VI. Tiphereth, beauty; VII. Nezach, triumph; VIII. Hod, glory or majesty; IX. Yesod, foundation; X. Malcouth, kingdom. Here we find the 'Powers' of Philo and the Eons of the Gnostics.

This primary world put forth Beriah, cretion; that is, the beginning of creation. The substances of this second world are all spiritual; but not having emanated immediately from En-soph, they are inferior to Sephiroth. From them, however, comes Yezirah, formation, the world; which contains angels, incorporeal beings surrounded by a luminous medium; also Asiah, fabrication; the last emanation, containing bodies subject to continual variations, which are born and perish, rise and fall. To this belongs all that is of a material nature. This lowest world is the seat of evil.

Man by his nature partakes of the three created worlds, and is on that account termed Microcosm, Olam Katan, or little universe; for all that Adam Kadmon, or Macrocosm (great universe), contains virtually,

man contains really. By his living principle man belongs to the world Asiah; by the soul or breath, to the world Yezirah; and by the intellectual principle or mind, to the world Beriah; the last is a portion of the divinity, and as such pre-existent. Man, then, is composed of two principles-a good and a bad one. It is his duty to give to the former dominion over the latter After death he is rewarded according to his works; for the mind, Neshamah, is immortal.

These pretended explanations increase the difficulties they are intended to remove, and only serve to exemplify the folly of attempting to dive into the Divine Essence. The transition from mind to matter, from absolute good to evil, remains enveloped in an impenetrable veil. At least, in its results, the system wholly departs from the Mosaic doctrine and ends in pantheistic mists. Instead of God creating all things by his will, we find a system of unintelligible emanations proceeding by some directing fate from we know not what deified nature.

TRANSFIGURATION, THE, is an important event in the history of our Lord, which is clearly related by three evangelists (Matt. xvii. 2, seq. Mark ix. 2, seq. Luke ix. 28, seq.). Matthew and Mark agree in stating that Jesus, taking with him Peter, James, and John, withdrew up into a high moun. tain, where he was transfigured; when, according to the latter, his raiment became white as snow, and according to the former, besides this, his face did shine as the sun. Luke, not using the term 'transfigure,' states that while Jesus was on the mount in prayer, the appearance of his countenance became different, and his raiment was white like lightning. Whence it appears that our Lord underwent externally a change which made his face and his raiment assume an unwonted brilliancy-a brilliancy which is represented by that of lightning and that of the sun.

These facts are in general well represented by the term 'transfigured,' which in the original strictly signifies a change of form, but is also used of an internal change, as in the transformed' of Rom. xii. 2, and the changed' of 2 Cor. iii. 18. The existence of the word in these two passages, showing on the part of Paul a reference to the transfiguration, proves that the event was known and recognised in the primitive church. An express allusion also is made to it in an Epistle whose authenticity has been questioned (2 Pet. i. 17, 18), but whose date cannot be placed long after the apostolic age.

The event whose existence and nature are thus made clear, had doubtless a significant import. Peter speaks of then beholding the majesty of Jesus, as well as hearing the Divine attestation as recorded in the Gospels,

This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.' On the occa

sion, there were present forms which were in some way known to be those of Moses and Elijah. Of these two emblems of the old and vanishing dispensation, Moses represented the Law, and Elijah the Prophets. They are seen in friendly converse with Jesus. Thus is there intimated that the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel, are three ministering spirits sent forth of God on the same benign erraud, namely, to instruct, reconcile and save the world. The whole transaction, in harmony with the Eastern method of teaching by actions and symbols, seems to be a striking and impressive lesson given to the three chief apostles, designed and specially fitted to transform their minds, by divesting them of their Jewish notions, and making them aware of the spiritual aims and tendencies of the Messiah's kingdom; and, as subsidiary to this purpose, to exhibit Moses and Elijah as in accordance with Jesus, and Jesus himself as the object of God's special approbation. Such an event is in spirit and result entirely congruent with Christianity, whose chief aim is the renewing of the soul of man (Col. iii. 10. 2 Cor. iv. 16. Rom. xii. 2. Tit. iii. 5. John iii. 5). This renewal is by the transfiguration strikingly and solemnly presented in Jesus, who thus stands at the head of his church, a grand symbol of the one needful change. The Transfiguration holds the middle place between the Temptation and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, being one of the three great events which in a marked manner illustrate the development of the gospel on earth, and the disclosure of the majesty' of its divine promulgator. See TABOR.

TRAVAIL, in the French travailler, 'to labour' travaux, labours,' is in Eccl. iv. 6. Is. liii. 11, the rendering of a Hebrew term which signifies and is translated labour' (Ps. xc. 10); also, especially as labour in hot climes is oppressive and exhausting, 'trouble' (Job v. 7) and sorrow' (Psalm lv. 10).

The word travail' brings to our mind a remarkable instance of narrowness, the result of prevalent misconceptions as to the laws of scriptural exegesis. The instance is furnished in a pamphlet published (1848) by Dr. J. Y. Simpson, Professor of Widwifery in the University of Edinburgh, who thus states the fact to which we refer: 'Not a few medical men have refused to relieve their patients from the agonies of childbirth, on the allegation that they believed that their employment of suitable anaesthetic means (as chloroform) for such a purpose, would be unscriptural and irreligious.' The belief is based on words found in what is termed 'the primeval curse' (Gen. iii. 14, seq.), "In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children.' The author replies, "If it is sinful to try to counteract the effects of this part of it (the

curse), referring to child-bearing women, it is sinful to try to counteract the other parts of it, regarding the state of the ground and the judgment upon man;' also that the word rendered sorrow' means labour or muscular exertion, adding, that owing to our erect form, &c., the great characteristic of human parturition is the vastly greater amount of muscular effort, toil, or labour, required for its accomplishment. The state of anesthesia (insensibility produced by chloroform) does not withdraw or abolish that muscular effort, but it removes the physical pain. It leaves the labour itself entire.' The latter part of the answer is almost as weak as the objection itself, proceeding as it does on the assumption that the labour under and apart from chloroform is the same thing. Doubtless, the writer in the Book of Genesis intended to refer the pains of parturition to God's curse pronounced in consequence of Eve's sin. His opinion is venerable for its antiquity, whatever may be thought of its perpetual obligation. Great evils have resulted from confounding two distinct and separate things-I. what the scriptural writers meant to say; II. what to us is the import of that which they do assert. Making their opinions obligatory on all generations, and yet finding those opinions in contradiction to their own, interpreters have done all manner of violence to the Bible, in order to force their own views on its authors, under the pretext of yielding to the authority and following the guidance of Scripture. In truth, its forms of opinion were intended to be, not everlasting cramps for the human intellect, but living impulses to a particular age, which expanding and growing in virtue thereof, would in part be prepared itself, and still more would prepare succeeding generations, for new conceptions, higher ranges of thought, and nobler views of duty, so as to make the Bible both the cause and the guarantee of perpetual progress.

TREES in Palestine were of old far more abundant than they are now, when the land wears a bare appearance from want of wood. In the period of Hebrew prosperity, the country was adorned with the tall and graceful cypress, the palm with its branching head, the outspreading fig, the bushy white mulberry, the handsome terebinth, the long-lived cedar, various species of oak, with other trees; to say nothing of many shrubs and plants.

In Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 13, seq. is an enumeration of many Palestinian trees, to each of which in turn Wisdom compares herself:'I was exalted like a cedar in Libanus, and as a cyprus-tree upon the mountains of Hermon. I was exalted like a palm-tree in Engaddi, and as a rose-plant in Jericho, as a fair olive-tree in a pleasant field, and grew up as a plane-tree by the water. As the turpentine-tree I stretched out my branches, and my branches are the branches of honour

and grace. As the vine brought I forth pleasant savour, and my flowers are the fruit of honour and riches.' Some, perhaps many, trees not mentioned, or at least not recognised in the Bible, originally adorned the surface of Palestine. Of these we may mention the walnut - tree, which was seen by Olin (ii. 418) near Safed, in Galilee. Early in May, according to Kitto ('Palestine,' 250), 'large walnut-trees may be seen bending to the ground under their loads of fruit. The

walnut-tree sometimes joins with the oak to overshadow the streams beyond Jordan.' We also cite these words from Robinson: 'We stopped for lunch a few rods short of the village (Jufna), under a large walnut-tree, like the English walnut, the first we had seen. It was growing within the precincts of an ancient church. Under the tree, a small enclosure contains an altar on which mass is still sometimes celebrated' (iii. 78).

A. Almond.
B. Box.
C. Fig.

D. Orange. E. Oleander. H. Cactus.

Here it was-on the banks of Elisha's stream, now called Ain Sultan (near Jericho). The clear, rushing waters flowed away under the spreading branches of gnarled old trees, and there were thickets beyond where the mules and horses could scarcely force their way. The green and golden sheeted lights and

broad shadows on the stream, were to our eyes like water to the desert traveller. As You Like It' was in my head all day, for here was an exact realisation of my conception of the forest - haunts of Rosalind and Jaques' (Martineau, 'Eastern Life,' iii. 54, 142).

TRIBES (L. tribus), representing (Gen. xlix. 28) the Hebrew shevet, which, according to its import, is (10) translated 'sceptre' and 'rod' (Levit. xxvii. 32), are family divisions of men that grew naturally out of the patriarchal mode of life, were among the earliest fixed states in which society was found, and have always prevailed in the East, where the most ancient usages have from age to age been preserved and transmitted. In agreement with other Oriental peoples-as, for example, the Edomites (Gen. xxxvi.), and the Ishmaelites, or Arabs (xxv. 12, seq. ; comp. xvii. 10)-the Hebrews, of an Aramaic nomad race, were in the fourth generation divided into twelve families, according to the names and descendants of the twelve sons of Jacob (xlix. 28). These sons were, Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, Benjamin. Of these, Levi was not reckoned as a tribe, because the Levites had no portion in the soil of Canaan. Joseph was divided into two, Ephraim and Manasseh (xlviii. xlix. 28). Four of these sons had slaves for their mothers, namely, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. Fach tribe was divided into families, and each family into houses (Numbers i. 2, 18). At the head of each tribe was its prince (16). Next stood the heads of their fathers' houses (Exod. vi. 14. 1 Chron. v. 15). The highest officer was called chief over the chief' (Numb. iii. 32). So among the modern Bedouins we find emirs, sheikhs, and fathers.

As representatives of the tribes there appear, now the twelve tribal princes of Israel (i. 44), now the heads of the fathers' houses (Josh. xiv. 1). Sometimes, without special reference to the distinction of tribes, the Hebrews are represented by their elders (Exod. iii. 16).

During the wandering in the desert, the tribes were divided into four classes, each of which contained three tribes The head of the first class was Judah, with whom were Issachar and Zebulun; the head of the second was Reuben, with whom were Simeon and Gad; the head of the third was Ephraim, with whom were Manasseh and Benjamin; the head of the fourth was Dan, with whom were Asher and Naphtali (Numb. x. 13, seq. See CAMP). In the division of Canaan, two tribes and a half settled on the east and nine and a half on the west of the Jordan (for the several localities, see the names and consult the Maps). The tribal system being thus transported from Egypt, where it was found by Moses, into Canaan (Josh. xiii. seq.; comp.

Joseph. Antiq. v. 1, 22), exerted but little binding influence on the people at large daring the disturbed era of the Judges, in consequence of the strong counteractions it had to withstand from the Canaanites, who not only dwelt in the land, but kept the several tribes apart one from another. The defective union occasioned weakness and brought on national thraldom. The division into tribes, however, remained in existence, and when royalty was set up, afforded effectual aid in promoting the national unity; while doing which, it grew in strength itself, and afforded a species of representative organisation, which on occasions displayed both power and vigour (1 Samuel x. 20, seq. 2 Samuel iii. 17, seq.; v. 1, seq. 1 Kings xii. 2 Chron. xxiv. 17). Before the exile, the tribes kept their separate existence; but after that event the tribal division disappears. Families henceforth formed the basis of genealogies (Ezra viii. Nehem. vii.), and their heads were the representatives of the nation (x.). But though the tribes as compact civil divisions had vanished, yet individuals, from genealogies or tradition, retained a knowledge of the tribes to which they belonged (Luke ii. 36. Acts xiii. 21. Romans xi. 1); and in the hopes connected with the Messiah, the twelve tribes remained as the representative of the nation and the basis of the expected kingdom (Matt. xix. 28. Apoc. v. 5, 9; vii. 4, seq.).

The division into tribes, in connection with the partition among them of the land of promise, made family registers, as the ground and evidence of family and individual rights, of the greatest consequence, and accordingly they became the foundation of Hebrew history. See GENEALOGY.

In Matt. xxii. 24, the law of Moses is spoken of which requires the brother of a deceased man, dying childless, to marry his widow and raise up seed to his brother,' or beget children, which should be accounted not his own, but his brother's. Many Jewish ordinances had for their aim to keep the tribes separate from each other, and the whole nation separate from the rest of the world. Such was the purpose of the requirement-called the law of the Levirate-mentioned above. The marriage of a widow by her brother-in-law was accomplished without much ceremony, because the widow of a brother that had died without children became forthwith the wife of that relative. Nevertheless, custom required that the union should be acknowledged before two witnesses, and that the brother gave the widow a piece of money. Some are of opinion that after the exile in Babylon the law was no longer observed, because the possessions of the tribes were not distinct from each other. It is said that the German and Italian Jews do not, or very seldom, act in accordance with it.