The Qumran-Essene Restraints on Marriage, Joseph Baumgarten.

The Dead Sea Scrolls
Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls- the New York University conference in memory of Yigael Yadin (ed. Lawrence H. Schiffman), JSOT Press, Sheffield 1990, p.13-24.

The fact that papers on celibacy1 continue to find their place on the agenda of Qumran colloquia is, I think, not only a reflection of the inherent interest in a social phenomenon widely held to be alien to mainstream Judaism, but also of the continuing uncertainty as to whether celibacy was in fact practiced at Qumran. Even for those scholars who deem the identification of the Qumran community with the Essenes to be a well-founded historical premise, the lack of congruity on the subject of marriage still poses a problem. Ancient writers are unanimous in depicting the rejection of marriage as one of the salient characteristics of Essene society, although, as Josephus informs us, there was a subgroup of Essenes who were unwilling to give up the propagation of the race as the ‘chief function of life’ (War 2.160). In the Qumran writings, by contrast, no such bifurcation on this fundamental issue has so far been detected. The Damascus Document (CD) as well as the Temple Scroll (11QT) highlight sectarian rules concerning marriage, and in the Messianic Rule (1QSa) matrimony is assumed to be a normal milepost in the maturation of a young man in the community of Israel.

If anyone were inclined to lend credence to the misogyny attributed by Philo and Josephus to the Essenes, we now have a Cave 4 text (4Q502) which lauds women possessing the qualities of ‘intelligence and understanding’ as ‘daughters of truth’ and ‘sisters’ within the yahad.2 Although we have elsewhere questioned the editor’s designation of the joyous celebration in this text as a ‘Rituel de mariage’,3 it does demonstrate that women had an integral role in the communal life of the Qumran sect. There is thus no longer any need to offer forced explanations for the burials of women and children in the Qumran cemetery. Moreover, since 4Q502 alludes positively to ’dm w’štw, ‘a man and his wife’, and expresses thankfulness for the ‘seed of blessing’ seen in the joining of young and old of both sexes, we may infer that Qumran ideology had a great deal more tolerance for the affirmation of family life characteristic of rabbinic Judaism than was previously thought.

Yet the ultimate emergence of Essene celibacy can hardly be dismissed. Nor can one ignore the multiple affinities both in organizational structure and in details of religious practice between the Essenes and the Qumranites.4 These affinities are becoming increasingly evident as the study of the Qumran literature progresses. Various scholars have already offered a spectrum of theological hypotheses, not all equally persuasive, to account for the emergence of celibacy from the perspectives of sectarian thought. We shall limit ourselves here to two circumscribed objectives. We should determine first, whether Qumran laws regarding marriage may have contributed to a tendency toward sexual abstinence, and, second, whether there is any textual evidence that celibacy was actually practiced by any part of the Qumran community.

We note first that Qumran writings reflect a markedly idealistic view of the marital relationship. It required full maturity on the part of the husband, ‘when he knows good and evil’ (1QSa 1.11). While rabbinic tradition viewed the age of twenty as a terminus ante quem for marriage, the sect took it to be the minimum requirement.5 We do not know whether there were corresponding age requirements for the wife, but in the light of 4Q502 we may assume that a certain level of moral maturity was considered essential.

There has been a great deal of scholarly debate about the denunciation of polygamy found in CD 4.20–21, ‘they take two women in their lifetime’, which can be taken to apply to remarriage after divorce as well.6 One of the questions which should have been posed but has not, to my knowledge, is how such restrictions would have been reconciled by the Qumran exegetes with Pentateuchal law which explicitly condones both polygamy and divorce. The whole subject of Qumran marriage halakhah must now be reassessed in the light of the Temple Scroll.

The author of the Temple Scroll was fully aware of the legality of polygamy and remarriage after divorce in the Torah. This can be inferred from the reference in 11QT 54.4 to the ‘vow of a widow or a divorced woman’ (Num. 30.10) and the beginning of 11QT 64 which, though only partially preserved, cites the provisions in Deut. 21.15 concerning a man who has two wives. Yet in elaborating the law of the king, the Temple Scroll provides that ‘he shall not take in addition to her [his first wife] another wife, for she alone shall be with him all the days of her life; and if she dies, he shall take for himself another from his father’s house’ (11QT 57.17–19). The only logical way to account for this discrepancy is to assume that the king as a role model for moral behavior was subject to supererogatory restrictions limiting him to one wife during her lifetime; divorcing her would not free him, as it would a commoner, to marry another. This two-tiered approach to halakhah is manifested elsewhere in the Temple Scroll in the sphere of ritual purity; here a distinction is made between ordinary men and those who aspire to a higher level of purity.7

What we have noted is, of course, directly pertinent to the proper understanding of the marriage restrictions in the Damascus Document. Here the ban of polygamy and by extension the prohibition of remarriage after divorce applicable to the king (nasi’) is held up as a model of the higher moral standard in marriage. According to this standard, marriage is an exclusive covenant between one man and one woman ‘in their lifetime’. It is called the ‘foundation of creation’, derived from the words in Gen. 1.27, ‘male and female He created them’. The further consequence drawn in the Gospels that what God has joined together cannot by man be put asunder8 is not explicitly stated in the Damascus Document, but we may infer from the Temple Scroll that the king as well as any morally scrupulous adherent of the sect could not remarry while his first spouse was still living. Needless to say, this lends a dimension of fateful finality to the one and only choice of a partner in matrimony.

It is worth noting in connection with this that the very similar views attributed to Jesus in the Gospels are followed by the inference of the disciples that ‘if such be the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry’ (Mt. 19.10).9 Prudence would dictate the avoidance of commitments which, once entered into, were incapable of being broken. Could it not well be that this consideration already led some Qumranites to weigh their desire for posterity against the fateful consequences of an inauspicious union?

Certainly, in the case of the marrying Essenes scruples such as these appear to have played a major role. Although they saw propagation as the chief function of life, Josephus (War 2.161) reports-
They give their wives a three years’ probation and only marry them after they have by three periods of purification given proof of fecundity. They have no intercourse with them during pregnancy, thus showing that their motive in marrying is not self-indulgence but the procreation of children.

The three periods of purification, that is, three menstrual cycles, seem to have a fairly clear and defined purpose- to demonstrate the regularity of the menses. Without such regularity the mandatory separation during the period of impurity would make marital life as well as procreation difficult, if not impossible.10 This may be illustrated by the ruling of Rabbi Meir that a woman who has no regular period is forbidden to her husband.11 But what was the nature of the three years’ premarital probation?12

The most plausible premise is that here we are dealing not with anything physical, but with a demonstration of character. The three-year probation may be presumed to be analogous to the probationary period of a novice before his full admission into the Essene order. This is indicated not only by the same time interval, but by the identical verb dokimazō employed by Josephus to denote the demonstration of character compatible with the discipline of the order.13 We now know from 4Q502 that women, too, were evaluated with regard to the moral traits required for participation in the religious life of the yahad. Moreover, while men who were found unsuitable could be expelled from the community, what was to be done with a wife found similarly incompatible, given the aforementioned limitations on divorce and remarriage? The need for careful and prudent investigation of their wives on the part of the marrying Essenes thus becomes readily understandable in the light of Qumran matrimonial law.

We saw above that procreation was held by the Essenes to be the only legitimate justification for marital life. Josephus illustrates this by alluding to their avoidance of intercourse during pregnancy. J. H. Charlesworth has drawn attention, moreover, to Syriac accounts in which the Essenes are said to have separated from their wives permanently once they became pregnant.14 It is difficult to know whether these accounts derive from reliable independent sources. However, in principle the restriction of marital relations during pregnancy should apply with equal force to men and women past their childbearing years. This would be directly pertinent to the stage of life characteristic of most Essenes.

Both Philo and Josephus (War 2.151) underline the advanced years of the Essenes. The former declares (Hypoth. 11.3)-

No Essene is a mere child nor even a stripling or newly bearded, since the characters of such are unstable with a waywardness corresponding to the immaturity of their age, but full grown and already verging on old age.

We have recently noted the confirmation of this in 4Q502 where the men and women of the yahad are repeatedly referred to as zeqenim and zeqenot or alternatively ’ashishim and nashim.15 One fragment preserves an intriguing exchange of blessings between a man and a woman in the presence of an assemblage of zeqenim and zeqenot. The man wishes the woman ‘long life amidst an eternal people’ (‘am ‘olamim), while she prays that he may be blessed likewise with peaceful longevity. The editor took this to be an exchange of vows between a bridegroom and his bride. However, the setting and the nature of the blessings suggest rather an already married couple of golden age contemplating their future within the Qumran yahad. One might in fact surmise that at a certain stage in their lives the mature men and women of Qumran, who may or may not have had children, publicly announced their resolve to henceforth live in celibacy, subordinating their personal relationship to the greater unity of the community. It is of such Essene elders that Philo wrote (Hypoth. 11.13)-

The elderly too even if they happen to be childless are treated as parents of a not merely numerous but very filial family and regularly close their life with an exceedingly prosperous and comfortable old age, so many are those who give them precedence and honour as their due.

The above-mentioned blessing for long life ‘in the midst of an eternal people’ is an eloquent expression of the Qumran desire for permanence and continuity. This theme is not confined to 4Q502; it is echoed in the concern about endurance and posterity articulated in other Qumran writings. A 4Q pesher applies the promise to the temimim that their inheritance will endure forever in Ps. 37.18- ‘to the penitents of the desert who shall live for a thousand generations . . . to them shall belong all the inheritance of Adam and to their seed forever’.16 Closely parallel to this is the assurance in the Hodayot ‘that they may serve Thee faithfully and that their seed may be before Thee forever . . . Thou wilt cause them to inherit all the glory of Adam and abundance of days’ (1QH 17.3–15). The term ‘seed’ is capable of being taken concretely to refer to an abundance of offspring, though it is used in a decidedly figurative fashion17 in the catechism concerning the two ways in 1QS 4.6–8-

These are the counsels of the spirit for the sons of truth in this world. And the visitation of all who walk in it shall be healing, great peace in a long life, and fruitfulness of seed (prwt zr‘) along with everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without end, a crown of glory and a garment of majesty in unending light.

There is, moreover, one highly significant passage in the Damascus Document in which the assurance of continuity appears counterposed to the normal pattern of family life. CD 6.11–7.6 contains an extended list of duties incumbent upon adherents of the sect identified as ‘they that walk in these in the perfection of holiness’. They are given the promise that ‘the covenant of God shall stand faithfully with them to keep them alive for thousands of generations’ (7.6; 19.20). This is immediately followed by the provision ‘And if they dwell in camps according to the order (serekh) of the land and take wives and beget children, they shall walk according to the Law’ (7.6–7). Students of the literary structure of the Damascus Document have not succeeded in elucidating the transition from the promise to the provision which follows it. Denis raises the question whether both are addressed to the same group, but provides no answer.18 Maier observes, ‘Der kurze Absatz ist ohne Zusammenhang’.19 Murphy-O’Connor describes it as ‘a floating fragment’ which drifted into the text because of vague verbal association.20 Cothenet notes the contrast between the apodictic form of the preceding prescriptions and the conditional formulation of the clause about those who marry and beget children, but concludes that the latter must be displaced.21 The place of this clause is, however, confirmed by both manuscripts A and B of the text.

The only valid conclusion to be drawn from all this is that the editor of CD placed this provision after the promise to those who walk in perfect holiness quite deliberately. Its adversative formulation22 beginning with the conditional ‘And if’ indicates that the previously mentioned aspirants to perfect holiness23 did not dwell in scattered dwelling places in the conventional manner of the land, did not take wives, and did not beget children. Instead they resolved ‘to keep apart from the Children of the Pit’ and to live in close association with other brethren. Yet they too were given the assurance ‘that they shall live for thousands of generations’, for God ‘keeps the covenant [i.e. the covenant of the community] and the grace to those who love him’ (Deut. 7.9). The posterity of the celibates within the yahad was vouchsafed through the continuity of the ‘am ‘olamim, the eternal community.

It is remarkable to find this promise echoed not only in substance but also verbally in the dramatic words of Pliny (Nat. Hist. 5.17) as he marvelled at the endurance of the Essene celibates-
Ita per saeculorum milia—incredibile dictu—gens aetema est, in qua nemo nascitur. Tam fecunda illis aliorum vita paenentia est.

In this way this people24 has lasted—strange to say—for thousands of generations, though no one is born within it. So fruitful for them is the penitence for life which others feel.
We note the striking verbal parallels-

saeculorum milia25 = ’lp dwr

gens aeterna = ‘m ‘wlmyrn

The word fecunda may be compared with prwt zr‘, ‘fruitfulness of seed’, also used metaphorically in 1QS 4.6–7, while paenentia brings to mind the frequently used sectarian epithet šby pš‘. Could Pliny, who used a multitude of written and oral sources for the geographical portions of his Natural History, have had access to Essene writings? We leave it to others to explore this question further.
Returning to the above-mentioned passage in the Damascus Document, if our interpretation is valid, we have here an important attestation in a Qumran source of the bifurcation in the practice of celibacy among the Essenes. The writer refers to sectarians who followed the normal way of life, residing in various camps, marrying and having children, but he also knew of those who never married or at a late stage in life renounced the continuation of marital relations because they aspired to the ‘perfection of holiness’.

The conflict between marital life and the ideal of holiness has already been explored by many scholars.26 Aside from the tendency toward a dualistic ethic which contrasts spirit and flesh,27 the most salient element is the Qumran concern with ritual purity. Here the Temple Scroll has helped to confirm and systematize the halakhic rules scattered in other Qumran texts. The ban on sexual relations in the ‘city of the Sanctuary’ was clearly intended for all of Jerusalem.28 While Pentateuchal law (Lev. 15.18) limits the period of defilement after intercourse to one day,29 11QT 45 extends it to three days. The model for such severe restriction was found in the preparations for the revelation at Sinai. However, while other exegetes viewed this as a singular non-normative requirement, the Qumranites adopted it as their standard. We may suppose that this had something to do with their belief in the revelation of new insights into the law as an ongoing process,30 thus requiring a perpetual state of purity.

In an illuminating study of Essene celibacy, Antoine Guillaumont31 has directed attention to the tradition, already found with Philo, that Moses renounced all conjugal relations from the time that he began to prophesy and act as God’s messenger. This theme is echoed in the Targumim (Num. 12.1–2) and is also found in Midrash Rabbah (Exod. 34.1). Interestingly, this Jewish tradition was cited by Aphraates, the Syrian homilist of the fourth century, in his defense against Jewish critics of the Christian celibates, called ‘sons of the covenant’, who dedicated themselves to the attainment of qaddishuta’, ‘holiness’.32 One wonders if Aphraates had any knowledge of the Qumran Covenanters who centuries earlier were similarly designated ’aneshe tamim qodesh and apparently took the same paradigm of the prophet as a model for permanent sexual abstinence.

The foregoing discussion suggests that celibacy at Qumran was never made into a universal norm.33 It was confined to those who emulated a ‘perfection of holiness’ requiring uninterrupted purity, and even for them perhaps only in the later stages of their lives. This would account for the fact that the Messianic Rule, in describing the practices of Israel at large, assumes that marriage would continue to be the ‘order of the land’.

It was only among the Therapeutae, the contemplative offshoot of the Essene brotherhood, that the renunciation of sexual life was turned into a philosophical ideal.34 Thus, Philo describes their aged virgins (Vita Contempl. 68)-

Eager to have wisdom for their life-mate they have spurned the pleasures of the body and desire no moral offspring but those immortal children which only the soul that is dear to God can bring to the birth unaided because the Father has sown in her spiritual rays enabling her to behold the verities of wisdom.

NOTES

1. H. Braun, Spätjüdisch-häretischer und frühchristlicher Radikalismus (Tübingen- J.C.B. Mohr, 1957), 40, and Qumran und das Neue Testament (Tübingen- J.C.B. Mohr, 1966), 40f., 192–93; A. Isaksson, Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple (Lund- C.W.K. Gleerup, 1965), 45–65; H. Hubner, ‘Zölibat in Qumran?’ New Testament Studies 17 (1970–71), 153–67; A. Guillaumont, ‘A propos du célibat des Esséniens’, Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer (Paris- Adrien Maisonneuve, 1971), 395–404; G. Vermes, The Impact of the Dead Sea Scrolls on the Study of the New Testament’, Journal of Jewish Studies 27 (1976), 107–16; J. Coppens, ‘Le célibat essénien’, Qumrân. Sa piété, sa théologie et son milieu, ed. M. Delcor (Paris- Duculot, Leuven- Leuven University Press, 1978), 295–304; N. Golb, ‘The Problem of the Origin and Identification of the Dead Sea Scrolls’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 124 (1980), 1–21; R.T. Beckwith, ‘The Earliest Enoch Literature and its Calendar’, Revue de Qumrân 10 (1981), 391–93; L.H. Schiffman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Chico, CA- Scholars Press, 1983), 13, 214f.; P.R. Davies, Behind the Essenes (Atlanta- Scholars Press, 1987), 73–85.

2. M. Baillet, Qumrân Grotte 4, III Discoveries in the Judaean Desert (Oxford- Clarendon Press, 1982), 81–105.

3. J.M. Baumgarten, ‘4Q502, Marriage or Golden Age Ritual?’, Journal of Jewish Studies 34 (1983), 125–35.

4. Note, for example, the similar avoidance of oil as a medium for ritual defilement, the same ban on commercial transactions among brethren of the order (see this writer’s papers in Revue de Qumrân 6 [1967], 183ff. and Israel Exploration Journal 33 [1983], 81–85), the similar rules about spitting, and the exclusion of latrines from the City of Jerusalem (Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll [Jerusalem- Israel Exploration Society, 1983], I, 398–400).

5. Cf. B. Qiddushin 29b with 1QSa 1.10–11.

6. For an evaluation of earlier literature see J.A. Fitzmyer, ‘Divorce among First-Century Palestinian Jews’, Eretz Israel 14 (1978), 103–10, who, however, does not take into account the implied legality of divorce in 11QT 54.4.

7. See 11QT 49.7–10- ‘and (covered) earthen vessels shall be unclean, and all that is in them shall be unclean for every clean man, and the open (vessels) shall be unclean for every man of Israel’, and Yadin’s discussion, Temple Scroll, I, 327.

8. Mt. 19.6; Mk 10.9; cf. 1 Cor. 7.10. As in CD, the stress in the NT is not so much on the illegality of divorce as on the sin of remarriage, which is seen as tantamount to adultery. In Mt. 19.9 the validity of divorce is explicitly recognized by the insertion of the exception, ‘unless it be for fornication’.

9. The inference regarding the inexpediency of marriage is found only in Matthew, which allows the exception of divorce on the grounds of fornication. It would, however, seem to follow a fortiori from the absolute rejection of divorce in Mark. Its place in Matthew derives perhaps from the link with the word aitia, ‘cause’, used in the question posed to Jesus- ‘Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any aitia?’ (Mt. 19.3). From this, it is inferred that if fornication is the only valid aitia for divorce, it is not prudent to marry. Prof. M. Smith, however, has privately suggested that the disciples’ question concerning the inexpediency of marriage in Matthew is intended to bring out the moderating conclusion that this teaching is not for all men (Mt. 19.11).

10. Philo, by contrast, was inclined to be lenient with those who persisted in a marriage which had proven to be unfruitful- ‘Those who marry maidens in ignorance at the time of their capacity or incapacity for successful motherhood, and later refuse to dismiss them, when prolonged childlessness shows them to be barren, deserve our pardon’ (Special Laws III, 35; cf. B. Yevamot 64a).

11. B. Niddah 12b. Rabbinic halakhah likewise took threefold recurrence of the menses after a fixed interval as valid indication of regularity (weset).

12. The hypothesis that this was a kind of trial marriage seems remote in the light of the trend of Qumran morality. The existence of trial marriages even in Ptolemaic Egypt is considered doubtful (see L. Mitteis and U. Wilcken, Grundzüge und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde 2 (Leipzig, Berlin- Teubner, 1912), 200–203.

13. meta gar ten tes karterias epideixin dysin allois etesin to ethos dokimazetai, ‘after this exhibition of endurance, his character is tested for two years more’ (War 2.138).

14. J.H. Charlesworth, ‘The Origin and Subsequent History of the Authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls- Four Transitional Phases among the Qumran Essenes’, Revue de Qumrân 10 (1980), 213–33, who cites S.P. Brock’s study of the account by Dionysios Bar Salibi.

15. Baumgarten, ‘4Q502, Marriage or Golden Age Ritual?’, 125–35.

16. 4Q171 1, 3–4, col. iii, 1–2, Discoveries in the Judean Desert, V (J.M. Allegro, Qumrân Cave 4, I [Oxford- Clarendon Press, 1968]), p. 44.

17. For the spiritualized connotation of ‘fruit’ see Wisd. Sol 3.13 and I. Heinemann, Philons griechische und jüdische Bildung (Breslau- M. & H. Marcus, 1932), 242 who observes ‘dass die Zeugung für Philon sehr häufig das Symbol geistiger Befruchtung ist’. Even the expression pry btn, ‘fruit of the womb’, is taken figuratively for the influence of the Teacher of Righteousness in a pesher on Ps. 127.3 (Discoveries in the Judean Desert, IV, 52).

18. A.-M. Denis, Les thèmes de connaissance dans le Document de Damas (Louvain- Publications universitaires de Louvain, 1967), 137.

19. J. Maier, Die Texte vom Toten Meer 2 (Munich- Ernest Reinhardt, 1960), 52. It is noteworthy that Maier considered the possibility that the provision was intended as a polemic against celibacy. He preferred, however, to take it as simply stressing observance of the Law. We would add that the injunction ‘they shall walk according to the Law’ refers not only to the men, but to their wives and children.

20. J. Murphy-O’Connor, ‘A Literary Analysis of Damascus Document VI, 2–VIII, 3’, Revue Biblique 78 (1971), 222.

21. E. Cothenet, Les textes de Qumran 2 (Paris- Letouzey et Ané, 1963).

22. On the adversative use of we-’im cf. CD 9.20, 13.3 and see T. Thorion-Vardi, ‘Die adversativen Konjunktionen in der Qumran-Literatur’, Revue de Qumrân 11 (1984), 576–77.

23. The fraternal duties of the Men of Perfect Holiness toward each other are underlined by a number of precepts derived from the Holiness Code in Lev. 17–26- ‘Let each man love his brother as himself’ (1QS 6.20; Lev. 19.18); ‘Let each man reprove his brother according to the commandment, and let no one bear a grudge from one day to the next’ (1QS 7.2–3; Lev. 19.17–18); cf. Murphy-O’Connor, ‘A Literary Analysis’, Revue Biblique 78 (1971), 210–16. The precept, ‘Let no one sin against his flesh-kin, by refraining from lust according to the statute’ (7.1–2) derives from the same sense of ‘brotherliness’ and is most likely directed against homosexual tendencies which may manifest themselves in a celibate order (cf. the penalties for indecent exposure in 1QS 7.12–14). Some commentators have erroneously taken the precept to refer to incestuous marriages, but comparison with CD 8.6 wsn’ ’yš ’t r’hw wyt’lmw ’yš bš’r bsrw, ‘hating each man his neighbor and despising each man the kin of his flesh’, shows clearly the metaphorical use of š’r bsrw to describe the presence or absence of a sense of fraternity.

The congregation of the Men of Perfect Holiness is further described in CD 20.2–8. Its more rigorous rules of discipline were the same as those specified for the men of Perfect Holiness in 1QS 8.20ff. as exemplified by permanent expulsion for transgressions of Torah laws (cf. Schiffman, Sectarian Law, 170–71). That those who followed the ‘perfection of way’ (tmym drk) constituted an elite element within the community is likewise indicated in 1QS 8.10- ‘When these have been established in the foundation of the community for two years in perfection of way with no blemish, they shall be set apart as holy within the council of the men of the community.

It may be noted that the amonoi (= temimim) are described in Rev. 14.5 as ‘they who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins’. The disparagement of family life reached its extreme in Christian Gnosticism which held the abandonment of ‘filthy intercourse’ to be necessary in order to become ‘holy temples’ (Acts of Thomas 8).

24. It is noteworthy that Pliny refers to the Essenes as a gens, a ‘clan’ or ‘people’. This usage is quite possibly also the one intended by Josephus when he ascribes to the marrying Essenes the concern that those who fail to do so would cause the disappearance of their genos, eklipein an to genos tachista (War 2.160). This threat to their own posterity (diadoche) would have been of more immediate concern to them than the fear that the ‘whole race would very quickly die out’ (Thackeray).

25. As far as we could determine, this phrase is used only once by Pliny and is not common in classical Latin.

26. The conflict between marriage and the requirements of full koinōnia was already stressed by Philo, Hypothetica 11.14.

27. Cf. 1QH 1.21–22; 3.21; 4.29–31; and D. Flusser, ‘The Dead Sea Sect and pre-Pauline Christianity’, Scripta Hierosolymitana 4 (Jerusalem- Magnes, 1958), 252–63.

28. Cf. CD 12.1–2 and Yadin, Temple Scroll, I, 288f.

29. Exod. 19.15 and Yadin, Temple Scroll, I, 289.

30. Cf. J.M. Baumgarten, Studies in Qumran Law (Leiden- E.J. Brill, 1977), 13–35.

31. A. Guillaumont, ‘A propos du célibat des Esséniens’, Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer (Paris- Adrien Maisonneuve, 1971), 395–404.

32. Guillaumont, ibid., 396.

33. In this respect there is a similarity to the circumscribed view of celibacy in Mt. 19.11.

34. Cf. Baumgarten, ‘4Q502, Marriage or Golden Age Ritual?’, 130–33.